DOCUMENT RESUME

EC 074 001 SO 005 482

AUTHOR Arkley, Alfred S.TITLE A Study of the Relationship of the Factors of

Organizational Climates of Low socio-Economic statusElementary Schools to the Political Orientations ofFifth-Grade Students. Final Report.

INSTITUTION Michigan State Univ., East Lansing.SPONS AGENCY National Center for Educational Research and

Development (DHEW/OE)', Washington, D.C. RegionalResearch Program,

BUREAU NO BR-0-E-064PUB CATE Jun 72GRANT 0EG-5-70-0024-509NOTE 101p.

ECRS PRICE MF-$0.65 HC-$6.58DESCRIPTORS *Disadvantaged Youth; *Educational Environment;

*Educational Research; Grade 5; Models; PoliticalAttitudes; *Political Socialization; Questionnaires;,Racial Factors; Socioeconomic influences; StudentAttitudes; student Behavior; *student schoolRelationship; Student Teacher Relationship; Urban;Schools

ABSTRACTThis study proposed to-determine how 5th grade

students' political orientations result from such socialcharacteristics as their sex, age, socio-economic status and race,and secondly, how student political orientations are influenced bythe organization of their school. Emphasis was upon examining theorganizational climate in an effort to see if this climate reinforcesa belief that these children are merely passive subjects, or if theyare active participants in the American political system. Onethousand twenty seven fifth-grade students from low socio-economicstatus elementary schools in urba districts filled out a civiceducation. questionnaire which measuredtheir orientation. towardaspects of the American political system, political knowledge, andpolitical behavior. Two hundred sixty-five teachers completed theOrganizational Climate Description Questionnaire (OODQ). Control wasi.ntroduced for the influence of student and teacher, sex, the race ofinterviewers .and students, socio-economic status. and age of student.Findings indicate that the elementary school organizational climatehas less relationship to student political behavior and orientationsthan the school's racial composition. The climate factors Leadershipinitiation and Source of Social.Cohesion were shown to relate to ateacher role model, and Sense of Organizational Attachment andAdministrative Structure to a- school role model. (SAM)

FILMED FROM BEST AVAILABLE COPY

FINAL REPORT

Project No. 0-E-064

Grant No. OEG-5-70-0024 (509)

A STUDY OF THE RELATIONS iIP OF THE FACTORS OF ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATES

OF LOW SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS TO THE POLITICAL

ORIENTATIONS OF 5TH GRADE STUDENTS

Alfred S. Arkley

Michigan State University

East Lansing, Michigan 48823

June 1972

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

Office of Education

National Center for Educational Research and Development

(Regional Research Program)

U S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH.EDUCATION A. WELFAREOFFICE OF EDUCATION

THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODuCED E&ACTLy AS RECEIVED ER3.,1THE PERSON C ORGANI2ATION ORICIWO-Ng IT POINTS U VIEW OR OPINIONS STATED DO NOT NECESSARHyREPRESENT OFFICIAL OFt ICE OF EnucATIoN PoSITION OR POLR.Y

FINAL REPORT

Project No. O-E-064

Grant No. 0EG-5770-0024 (509)

A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE FACTORS OF ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATES

OF LOW SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS TO THE POLITICAL

ORIENTATIONS OF 5TII GRADE STUDENTS

Alfred S. Arkley

Michigan State University

East Lansing, Michigan 48823

June 19 72

The research reported herein was performed pursuant to a grant with theOffice of Education, U.S. Department of Health, flducation, and Welfare.Contractors undertaking such projects under Government sponsorship areencouraged to express freely their professional judgment in the conductof the project. Points of view or opinions stated do not, therefore,necessarily represent official Office of Education position or policy.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OFHEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

Office of EducationNational Center for Educational Research and Development.

ABSTRACT

Four organizational climate factors were identified from the

Organizational Climate Description Questionnaire of A. W. Halpin and

D. B. Croft. These factors were identified after Halpin and Croft's

original climates did not appear in the OCDQ responses of 265 teachers

in 18 inner-city elementary schools in two urban Michigan school dis-

tricts.

A shortened version of R. D. Hess and J. V. Torney's question-

naire measured 1027 fifth-graders orientations in the 18 schools,

toward the political comunity, regime, and authorities and their

political. knowledge and behavior. A multivariate analysis tested the

relationship between the student political orientations and behavior

and the four organizational climate factors; controlling for student

socio-economic status, race, and sex, interviewer race, and teacher

sex.

The study concluded that the organizational climate factors

were weakly related to student political orientations an behavior

through two Processes of student observational learning, either the

teacher or the school serving as the model. Factor IT, Leadership

Initiation, and III, Source of Social Cohesion, were related to a

teacher role model and Factors I, Sense of Organizational Attachment,

and IV, Administrative Structure, were related to a school role model. ,

The most important predictor of student political orientations and

behavior was school racial composition with all-Bieck:schools having

students with participant political orientations and behavior and

a11-White schools having students with subject political orientations

and behavior .

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES Iii

CHAPTERS

ONE INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH PROBLEM

TWO METHODS

THREE THE FOUR ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE FACTORS

FOUR TEACHERS AND ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE FACTORS

FIVE STUDENT POLITICAL ORIENTATIONS AND BEHAVIOR

SIX CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDIX

1

9

20

35

45

63

ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE DESCRIPTION QUESTIONNAIRE 70

B. OCDQ QUESTIONS THAT COMPOSE EIGHT SUBTESTS 79

C. CIVIC EDUCATION QUESTIONNAIRE 81

LIST OF TABLES

Table Pe

9-1 SCHOOL CHARACTERISTICS 10

2-2 SIMPLE CORRELATIONS AMONG THE CONTROL VARIABLES 1')

2-3 SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS PERCENTILE SCORES 14

2-4 INDICATORS OF PARENT'S SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS 15

3-1 THREE-FACTOR VARIMAX ROTATIONAL SOLUTION FORSUBTEST SCORES BY SCHOOL' 4

FOUR-FACTOR VARIMAX ROTATIONAL SOLUTION FORSUBTEST SCORES BY SCHOOL 25

263-3 SCHOOL FACTOR SCORES

3-4 FACTOR I - DISENGAGEMENT AND ESPRIT 27

4-1 RANK OF THOSE WHO TEACH THE STUDENT TO BE A GOODCITIZEN 36

4-2 TEACHER CITIZENSHIP INFLUENCE IN FACTOR IICLIMATE AND RACIALLY DIFFERENT CLASSES

4-3 RANK OF BENEVOLENCE OF AUTHORITY FIGURES ANDINSTITUTIONS

4-4 RANK OF INFALLIBILITY OF AUTHORITY FIGURES ANDINSTITUTIONS

39

40

4-5 RANK OF PUNITIVE POWER OF AUTHORITY FIGURES ANDINSTITUTIONS 41

4-6 TEACHER INFALLIBILITY IN FACTOR II AND FACTOR III

CLIMATES 43

571 STUDENT EVALUATION OF THE POLITICAL REGIME 49

5-2 STUDENT PERCEPTION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF LAWS 50

TEACHER BENEVOLENCE IN FACTOR II AND FACTOR IVCLIMATES 55

Ill

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH PROBLEM

In-this exploratory study I will discuss the contributions ofthe elementary school organizational climate to student politicalorientations that are independent of the questionnaire, administrator'srace, the teacher's sex, and the students' age, race, sex, and socio-economic status. I will discuss two processes of political socializa-tion. First I will discuss how students' political orientations resultfrom such social characteristics as their sex, age, socio-economicstatus, and race. Second I will discuss how studc-.t political orienta-tions are influenced by the organization of the oehool. This studyinvolved 1027 fifth-grade studentsjand 265 teachers in eighteen lowsocio-economic status elementary schools in two urban school districts.

Robert D. Hess and.Judith V. Torney have found that an elemen-tary school student's political orientationsarc partially related tostudent age-and sex. As the student grows older his orientations to-ward political objects become more specific and conceptually complex.Hess and Torney also state that, "Boys acquire attitudes more rapidlythan girls and they are more interested in political matters,"1 andthat students of low socio-economic status participate in less politi-cal activity and feel, "less efficacious in dealing with the politicalsystem." 2 Edward S. Greenberg has found that black elementary schoolstudents hold different political orientations than white Children andthat lower class children-are far less supportive of.the political

Butsystem than those of the middle class.=3 But none of the above studiesclaim to explain completely elementary school political attitudes.Hess and Torney conclude that, "while it may be argued that the familycontributes web to the socialization that goes into basic loyalty tothe country, the school gives content, information, and concepts whichexpand these early feelings of attachment."4 Greenberg does not specu-

- late about the relationship of the elementary school environment tothe political orientations of the students. The four schools he

Robert D. Hess and Judith V. Tofaey, The Development of Politi-cal Attitudes in- Children (Chicago: Aldine, i967), P.. 222.

2Ibid., p. 224.

Edward S. Greenberg, "Political Socialization to Support of theSystem: A Compariston of Black and White Children," (Ph.D. dissertation,University of Wisconsin, 1969), chp. 6.

4Robert D. Hess and Judith V. Torney, o cit., p. 217.

1

1

investigated were similar in termsj of physical appearance and socio-economic environment. 5 He did not attempt to measure the organiza-tional climate of the schools.

Both studies indicate that a student's political orientationsvary according to the position he occupies in the social structure.This position initially is largely determined by the social positionof the family. The neighborhood in which the family lives usually iscongruent with their socio-economic status clue to the homogenousnature of most residential areas. The child's first socialorienta-dons and behavior patterns replicate those of the adults either inhis family or position in the neighborhood. The child's initialsocialization tends to replicate the family's Social position.

The processes by which these orientations and behaviors arelearned have been identified by Hess and Torney as the identificationand Interpersonal Transfer Models.6 They argue-that the child enters

the school with a binidle of experiences in interper5onal relationshipsthat havebeen loaned by the "child's imitation of the behavior of

some significant other person -- usually a parent.. . "7 The school

also-Can either replace or supplement the family and provide moresignificant others for the child to imitate. The Interpersonal Trans-

fer Model explains how social-orientations learned through the processof imitation are transferred to objects in other social systems. Hess

and Torrey argue that the school adds to student political orientationsthrough an imitative., process and throUgh interpersonal transfer al-though they do not discuss the relative contribution of each of theseprocesses to the acquisition of political orientations.

The second process of political socialization I will examine

sees student political orientations as influenced by the organization

of the school. Organization of the school has been classified in at

least three ways: first by the formal organizational attributes thatdo not directly reflect human organizational interactions -- contentof curricula, per capita expenditures, number of library books, etc.;-second by the social composition of the school -- race, sex, socio-

economic status, ethnic group, etc.; and third by interpersonal rela-tions prevailing within the school -- morale, social ne'eds satisfac-

tion, authority patterns, etc.

I have found no studies that discuss the relationship of theper capita expenditures, number of library books, and related data to

elementary student political Orientations. Many studies of school

--Edward S. Greenberg, op. cit., pp. 259-261.

6_Robert D. Hess and Judith V. Torrey, 12.ps-A., pp. 19-

7Ibd., p. 21.

racial segregation have shown that predominantly black schools havelower per capita expenditures.8 -Since these schools do containstudents whose political orientations differ from those of studentsin the more affluent schools one might suppose-that increased expendi-tures might change political orientations. No study has discussedthe effect of increased expenditures upon political orientations,although many have shown that increased school expenditures do notaffect student achievement.9

Another formal organization attribute is the school curriculum.Hess and Torney have reported the political education curriculum isuniform at the elementary school level for white urban schools. They

concluded that for ail the schools they examined, "compliance to rulesand authority is the major focus of civics education in elementaryschools."19 Instead of reporting school by school differences theymerely summarized the teacher reports of civic education. Then theysummarized all the student political orientations by grade and showedhow the school influenced the student because there were changes fromgrade to grade. Hess and Torney used this procedure apparently be-cause they could not find a relationship between curriculum andstudent political orientations that occurred at the school level.Edgar Litt had the same problems with the formal curriculum whenstudying secondary schools, even when he discovered differences inthe political content of the school's curricula.11

Since the formal attributes of school apparently do differ asdo student political orientations, some intervening variable mightpossibly explain the relationship between the formal school organiza-tion and student political orientations. Perceptive teachers inelementary schools have speculated about this relationship and thepossible intervening variables. The eneral conclusion of teacherslike Jonathan Kozo1,12 James Herndon 3 and Herbert Kohl,'4 aria John

Cf., Kenneth B. Clark, Dark Ghetto (New York: Harper & Row,1965) and Charles E. Silberman, Crisis in Black and White (New York:Random, 1964).

9Cf., James C. Coleman, et al., Equality of Educational Op-

tunity (Washington D. C,: G.P.O., 1966) and U. S. Commission on CivilRights, Racial Isolation in the Schools (Washington, D.C.: G.P.O.,1967).

10Robert D. Hess and Judith V. Torney, op.eit, p. 110,

11Edgar Litt, "Civic Education, Community Norms, and Political

indoctrination," American Sociological Review 28 (1963): 69=75.

12Death At An Early Age (New York: Bantam, 1967).

13_Spored (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1968).

1430Children (New York: New American Library, 1967) .

3

Holt,15

is that the attitude of the teacher and how well his positionis supported by the rest of the faculty are important to what the stu-dent learns has been given some strong scientific backing in the re-search of Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson which showed that theattitudes of the teachers affect the achievement and mearured intelli-gence of low socio-economic status elementary students.1

The second explanation of the relationship of the school organi-zation to student political orientations focusses on the social com-position of the school. Like the first type of explanations stressfamily social status, this explanation examines the student's socialcontext in relation to his political orientations and behavior. Theschool fulfills its role in political socialization by providing ameeting place for the students to socialize each other. At thesecondary level there is much evidence that this has much influence butat .the elementary level there is little evidence that the peer groupinfluences elementary student political orientations. Hess and Torneyconclude that, "participation in peer group organizations within theschool or outside it does not have a significant effect upon thesocialization process."17 David Lavin points out that, "elementaryschool students may not be sufficiently autonomous to develop peergroup norms independent of their teachers' attitudes."18 All thissuggests that the adult organization of the elementary school not thepeer group organization, strongly. effects a student's political orienta-tions.

The impressionistic reports of a ghetto teacher like JonathanKozol in Death At An Early Age, and the research of Robert Rosenthaland Lenore Jacobson in Pygmalion in the Classroom, suggest that theelementary school faculty's orientation toward the students is possiblythe intervening variable between the socio - economic status of thestudent and student political orientations. Per capital expenditures,curricula content, and socio-economic composition of the school, allcorrelate highly with the student's social position and thus cannotpredict student political orientations once the student's socio-economic status is determined. So it would appear that orientations.towards students by the teachers affects student orientations andbehavior.

15How Children Fail (New York: Delta, 1964) and How Children

Learn (New York: Pitman, 1967).

16_Pygmalion in the Classroom (New York: Holt, Rinehart &

Winston, 1968).

17Robert D. Hess and Judith. V. Torney, op. cit., pp. 218-219.

18

p. 137.The Prediction of Academic Performance (New York: Wiley 1965)

This leads us to a third way the schoo f can influence studentpolitical orientations: through the interaction patterns and normsthat occur within the school. Gabriel Almond and Sidney Verba defineschool organization in terms of the patterns of interpersonal rela-tionships between the teacher and the students. They found that theschool, so defined, did have an effect upon the political orientationsof the students. Respondents who remembered participating in classdiscussions and debates and who remembered discussing unfair treatmentor disagreements with teachers felt more efficacious in politics thandid-those who remembered no such participation. When Almond and Verbastudied the effects of socio-econothic status on political orientationsthey found that low socio-economic status students had fewer partici-patory experiences and felt politically less efficacious. They alsofound that having an opportunity to participate within the schoolraised the political efficacy levels of low socio- economic statusstudents more than those of other students.19

Almond and Verba found that students of low socio-economicstatus were usually not allowed to participate. in the decision-makingprocess. This practice created an interaction pattern in which havingfew chances for participation led to the student's feeling ineffica-cious concerning political decision-making. When the practice andhence the interaction pattern changed, the student's political orienta-tion also changed." The more usual process of political socializationdoes not ordinarily result from a specific decision that "We are goingto teach low socio-economic status children that they are not to parti-cipate in decision-making." Rather it just happens because people actout their social roles. The many studies of American racism and sexismindicate the pervasiveness of this pattern. 21 The effect upon the childis the same: a political orientation is learned.

Each organization encourages interaction patterns and norms en-abling the organizational member to achieve both his own goals and thoseof the organization at the least cost. Thus each organization is likea small society with its own culture that guides the members' behaviorand values, a culture which has been named by organizational theor-ists as "organiZational climate."23

19Gabriel Almond and Sidney Verba, Civic Culture (Princeton:

Princeton H.P., 1963), pp. 352-353.

20

norm.It is also posSible that.the interaction pattern precedes the

21-f., Germaine Greer, The Female Eunuch (New York: McGraw-Hill,

1971) and Charles E. Silbcrman, ET-sit., "Consciousness raising" isthe way the women's liberationists make this process manifest.

22Cf., Chris Argymis, Integratingthe Individual and the Organi-

zation (New York: Wiley, 1964) especially pp. 75-92.23

Renato Tagiuri and George H. Litwin-(eds.),- OrganizationalClimate (Cambridge: Harvard, 1968) section A.

5

Andrew J. Halpin and Donald B. Croft developed a questionnaire,the Organizational Climate Description uestionna4e (OCDQ), to measurethe organizational climate of elementary schools.24 They identified sixorganizational climates that they placed on a continuum from Open toClosed. In essence the Open climate was one where authority was shared,communication was open, and a feeling of trust and cooperation pre-vailed. In the Closed climate the opposite conditions prevailed, andthe four other, climates -- Autonomous, Controlled, Familiar, andPaternal -- fell in between.25

These organizational climates are quite similar to the classifi-cations developed by Chris Argyris and Rensis Likert. Argyris identi-fied four organizational structures that move from Structure I, Pyra-midal Structure, to Structure IV, Power According to Inevitable Organi-zational Responsibilities.26 The.individual in the Pyramidal Structureis dependent and passive and develops a non-participatory politicalorientation. The person in the fourth structure is independent andrealizes both organizational goals and his own goal of self-actualiza-tion. The political orientation of such a person is participatory.Likert has developed a similar scheme in which he has identified fourmanagement.systems, the Exploitive Authoritative, the Benevolent Authotative, the -Consultative, and the Participative Group,27 Again in theExploitive Authoritative the employee is passive and has low participa-tion in the decision-making process. At the other-end of the continuumthe Participative Group the employee is independent and has high parti-cipation in the decision-making process.

Argyris and Likert discuss the impact of _organization structureupon the behavior and norms of the organizational members. Theirschemes of classification imply the organizational climates describedabove. Halpin and Croft directly measure organizational climate andimply the types of organizational structures described by Argyris andLikert. Since my concern is the child in the organization who observes_and interacts with the adults, the concept of organizational climate isthe more useful to me because it summarizes the adult interactions andnorms in terms of organizational members interacting with clients.- Inmy case the teachers are the organizational members and the students

24The Or nizational Climate of Schools (Washington, D.C,c HEW,Office of Education, CRP-543, July, 1963).

25Andrew W. Halpin, The and Research in Admini a o NewYork; Macmillan, 1966), pp. 170-181.

26Chris Argyris, op. cit. hp.

27Rensis Likert, The Human Organization (New York: McGraw -Hill,1967).

are the clients.

The student learns the organizational climate of the school.through a process of observational learning described by Albert Bandura.--Herbert Hirsch has pointed out hew the process Bandura discusses appliesto political socialization:

Bandura feels that "no trial" or 'observational" learningis "highly prevalent among homo sapiens, exceedingly ef-ficient and, in cases where errors are dangerous or costly,becomes an indispensable means of transmitting and modify-ing behavioral repertories..." Observational learning de-pends upon the learner's being exposed to "real -life, modelswho perform, intentionally or unwittingly, patterns of be-havior that may be imitated by others." In observationallearning the subject neither makes a response nor gets areward -- he does not have to manifest any overt behavior.Imitation, for Bandura, does not mean behavior matching.The modeling 7-ocess, or the process of observationallearning starts behavior, but matching does not have to beovert. It simply means that a person will have a tendencyto "reproduce the actions, attitudes, or emotional re-sponses exhibited by reel-life or symbolized models."29

Hirsch used the observational learning model to explain why the familyis replaced by other agents such as television and school in his studyof Appalachian elementary and secondary school students.30 In thisstudy I propose that the teacher is an important model for the lowsocio-economic status student. The organizational climate of theelementary school creates the model that the student perceives whenint eracting with the teacher. The political components of the schooltsorganizational climate are then transmitted to the child through theprocess of observational learning.

Some evidence indicates that low socio-economic students arebeing socialized into political orientations that predispose them to-ward subject behavior 1.e. low sense of political efficacy, high

2-Albert Bandura, "Behavior- Modificatidn Through Modeling Proce-dures," in Leonard Krasner and Leonard Ullman (eds) , Research in Be-havior Modification (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965).

29_Herbert Hirsch, EaTIaanLlialiticizat -n (New York: Free

Press, 1971), p. 22 The quotations are from Albert Bandura, op.cit.pp. 312-314.

3aHirsch, 2,p, cif. , chp.

apathy, and low political activity. Even though the teacher providea salient model for political learning, Hess and- Torney found .thatspite of the children's greater sensitivity to the influence of theschool, "children in working class areas of the city -areless complete-ly socialized (in the sense of being prepared for politicalparticipa-tion). than children from middle class,homew."31 _This indicates thatthe elementary school generates orientations unfavorable to'participa7tion in the pOlitical system among students of low socio-eConomic.status. . What this exploratory study is trying to find out is whetherthe elementary school organizational climate reinforces a belief in_these children that they are merely passive subjects, or are. therefactors of the school climate that .reinforce the belief that-the-student_ can be an active participant in the American political system?

in

1Robert D. Hess and Judith V. Torney, op. cit., p. 225.

CHAPTER TWO

METHODS

A. RESEARCH -DESIGN

The purpose of this research design is to. find the independentcontributions of the various factors of the elementary school organiza-tional climate by controlling for the influence of the sex of the teach-er and student, the race of the interviewer andstudent, and the socio-econordo status and age of the student. Control was introduced in twoways: first, by selecting the elementary sohOols to be-studied andsecond, statistically by using .control variables in a Multivariateanalysis.

For:the-reasons explained in Chapter One, the sample of .elemen-.tary schools was selected 'so as to .contain-a large majority of lowsocio- economic status students.. This was done by..selecting fourteen"Section 3- Schools," schools receiving State of Nachiganfinancialsupport .to educate culturally and economically-deprived children.IFour other schools were selected that were very-close'to.being eligiblefor such aid. kanmmary pfthe characteristics of the eighteen schoolsis shown in Table 271.- -The neighboring environment of the school wascontrolled in that each was located in the inner -city section of -oneof- two-urban schooldistridts lecated,in one of two medium-sizedMichigan cities of approximately 150,000 population.

Student age was Controlled-by.having only fifth- grade studentsanswer the Civic Education-Questionnaire. The average age of thestudent respondents was 10.7 years with only slight variation amongthe schools. All but one sample classroom inthe eighteen schoolscooperated. A total of fortyfour fifth-grade classrooms completedthe Civic Education Questionnaire. Thus through sample selection it-was possible to control for school socio- economic status and studentage.

:Control was also introduced by selecting-variables to use inthe least squaresequation when calculating-the multiple correlation

1The criteria that muot be met to make a school eligible for

receiving section 3 financial aid is explained in section 3 of Act N-312 of the Public Acts of 1957, as amended, and section 14 of Act No.287 of the Public Acts of 1964, being sections 388.613 and 388.104of the Compiled Laws of 1948 of the State of Michigan.

9

TABLE 2-1

SCHOOL CHARACTERISTICS

School

1

PercentNon-WhiteTeachers

83.3

75.0

PercentNon -White

Students

97.4

99.1

PercentSub-StandardHousing

35.1

11.8

MeanSES

Score

.6059

.5763

PercentMale

5th GradeTeachers

66.7

50.0

Mean5th Grade

Age

10.6

10.6

3 80.0 96.8 n.a.2 .5300 0 10.5

4 63.6 63.6 18.4 .5696 66.7 10.7

5 46.2 87.5 37.0 .4895 66.7 10.6

6 80.0 98.9 23.7 .4959 0 10.7

7 77.8 91.3 39.6 .5091 50.0 10.7

23.5 95.5 45.5 .4224 50.0 10.5

0 6.7 47.5 .4466 50.0 10.9

10 31.3 80.8 57.1 .4335 50.0 10.8

11 0 38.7 57.0 .3844 100.0 10.8

12 33.5 94.9 58.7 .4875 66.7 10.6

13 32.1 96.8 55.9 .4288 20.0 10.7

14 10.0 7.0 n.a. .5168 100.0 10.8

15 3 99.2 48.0 .4072 50.0 10.5

16 20.8 76.3 50.5 .5047 33.3 10.7

17 0 2.5 .5217 0 10.5

18 15.8 1.1 41.a. .5057 60.0 10.5

1Socio-Economic Status

2Not available

10

coefficient. Five' control variables that could meet three conditionswere selected. First, the control variable needed to-be conceptually

. related to the dependent variable, i.e. the student political orienta-tion. Second, the Control- variables needed to be related statisticallyto variations in the dependent variable. Third, the control variablesneeded to be independent-of each other so-that a least squares equationcould be used..

Since seven of the thirty-six correlations among the controlvariables exceeded .30 as shown in Table 2-2, it appeared that I had asmall problem concerning independence. So I used the least squaresdeletion, routine to test whether any of the control variables wouldsignificantly explain the variations in each of the organizationalclimate factor scores. The variations of Factor I, Sense of Organization-al Attachment, and Factor IV, Administrative Structure, could not besignificantly explained by any of the other control variables. FactorII, Leadership Initiation correlated -.53 significant at .025 with theproportion of boys in the class. As the number of boys in the classesincreased the organizational climate of the school became more cen-tralized. It is possible that those schools where the number of boysexceeded the girls it was felt necessary to centralize school authoritybecause boys are more likely to threaten it than girls.

Factor III, Source of Social Cohesion correlated -.52 signifi-cant at .024. As the socio-economic status of the students rose theteachers began to integrate their-teaching. goals with their need .tobelong to a social group. In the school with low socio-economic. statusstudents the source of the teachers' social cohesion was-not-relatedto their teaching task but instead was related -to their need-tobelong to a group-. Within-the sample of low socio-econaMic schoolsthere were schools that were "tie .bottom of the bottom." The teachersin these Schools cooperated together-but not to achieve the' teachinggoals of the State of.Michigan but rather to.enjoy_eachother'scompany. Thus when I find-Factor II br III explaining_the variance instudent political- orientations it could also- be explained by the sexand socio-economic status of the student... Cc:inversely any explanation'by the sex or socio-economic status of the student could also beex-plained by Factors II or III.

Control variable one was student sex. Each school was assigneda percentage based on the number of boys in the fifth-grade class.Much evidence indicates that elementary school age boys view politicsand the political system differently from girls. Fred I. Greensteinfound that boys were more political than girls, knowing more politicalinformation and more likely to suggest political solutions to societalproblems.2 Robert D. Hess and Judith V. Torney concluded that, "boysconsistently display more active involvement and politicized concern

2Fred I. Greenstein, Children and_ Politics (New Haven; Yale

U.P., 1965), pp. 115-118.

11

TABLE 2-2.

SIEFIF CORRELATIONS AMONGTHE CONTROL VARIABLES

Factor' I

Factor

I

1 00

Factor

II

Factor

III

Factor

IV

SES

of

Student

Race.

Race.

of

of

Student Interviewer

Sex...

of

Student

Sex

of

TeaCher

Factor. II

.00.

1,00

Factor III

.00

.00

1.00

Factor IV

.00

.00

.00

1.00

of Student

.13

-.07

-.52

-.29

1.00

Race of Student

.23

-.01

.45

.16

1.00

Race of Interviewer'

.11.

-.17'.

.27

.09

--.11

.26

1.00

Sex of Student

.16

,.53

.04

-.16

-.28

-.28

-441

1,00

Sex of Teacher

.17

.27'

-.20

-.36

-.09

.42

1.00

than girls, especially in partisanship and in polarization on politicalissues."3

Control variable two was student race. Each school was assigneda percentage based on the number of Black students in the fifth-gradeclass. This percentage correlated -.97 with the school student racialproportion, .73 with the teacher racial proportion for the school, and.62 with the teacher racial proportion of. the fifth-grade classes.The. class student racial proportion control was used because it isthe racial measure most directly associated with the student politicalorientations.

Edward S. Greenberg found much evidence to indicate that Blackstudent political orientations differed from those of White students.He found that "black children seem to arrive at a 'subject' stancetoward the political order, as opposed to a 'participant' stance" forWhite children.4 Greenberg concluded that "there are tendencies forNegroes and whites to both see and evaluate the political community,the -egime, and authority figures differently:"5

Control variable three was student socio-economic status, SEE.This was' determined by the response of the student to questions inthe Civic Education Questiorbaire6 concerning the occupations of theirmother and father. An SES percentile score was assigned to each stu-dent on the basis of his responses to questions 28 and 29. Table 2-3shows the SES percentile score for each occupation. Two SES percentilescores were assigned to each student, one for the father's occupationthe other for the mother's. The higher of these two scores was thenassigned to the student. Only one score was assigned because some ofthe children had only one parent.

Table 2-4 shows the rank of the occupation choices contained inquestions 28 and 29. Question 28 concerning the mother's occupationhad six items of which two do not indicate SES, "She stays home mostof the time and has no job" an. d "I do not know what my Mother orGuardian does." The four remaining items were ranked from low to highSES, then each item was assigned a percentile score derived from theremainder of the sample. The same procedure was applied to question

The Development of Political Attitudes in Children (Chicago:Aldine, 1967), p. 194.

4Edward S. Greenberg, "Political Socialization to Support of

the System: A Comparison of Black and White Children," (Ph.D. disserta-tion, University of Wisconsin, 1969), p. 228.

5lbid., p. 247.

6f. Appendix C.

13

TABLE 2-3

SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS PERCENTILE SCORES1

Mother - Question 28

ItemNumber N

103

278.

137

134

Percentageof Total Midpoint

CumulativePercentage

Socio-EconomicStatus Score

5. .1580

.4264

.2101

.2055

.0789

.2131

.1050

..1027

.1580

.5844

.7945

1.0000

.0790

.3712

.6894

.8972

Father - Question 29

ItemNumber N

Percentageof Total Midpoint

CumulativePercent

Socio-EconomicStatus Score

7.. 34 .0468 .0234 .0468 .0234

1. 401 .5523 .2761 .5991 .3229,

2. 135 .1859 .0929 .7850 .6920

.77 .1060 .0530 .8911 .8380

24 .0330 .0165 .9242 .9076

41 .0564 .0282 .9807 .9524

14 .0192 .0096 1.0000 .9903

1Each student was assigned the highest of the two socio-economic status

scores, the school mean was assigned to each school. The socio-

economic status score correlated highly with all the categories and

is the single best predictor of the variation in Questions 28 and 29.

14

TABLE 2-4

INDICATORS O PARENT'S SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS

Description and SES Rank of Mother Occupation

Rank w) Occupation

1.

2.

4.

Rank

She is looking for a job.

She works in a factory, laundry, restaurant, hotel, orhouse as a maid or waitress or some other job where sheworks with her hands.

She works as a saleslady, clerk, Or secretary.She owns a small store.She wears a uniform or nice clothes to work.

She is a teacher, social worke , lawyer, nurse or somejob like that.She has a college training for her job.

Description and SES Rank of Father's Occupation

Occu ation

1. He is looking for a job.

2.

4.

5.

He works in a factory or mill, or as a truck driverijanitor, or some other job where he works with hishands.

-He works with his hands in a job that takes a longtime to learn like a carpenter, an electrician, aplumber, a TV repairman a machinist, etc.

He works in an office, or store for somebody else.He works as a salesman, clerk, or bookkeeper.He owns a` service station, laundry or small store.He is a fireman, soldier, policeman, or works forthe government.He usually wears a uniform or a white shirt and tieto work.

He works in an office as a manager or executive.

6. He is a doctor, lawy. er, teacher, eng neer.or some joblike that.

7. He owns a large business, like a factory or a big store.

15

29 concerning the father's occupation.

rl eleweetery %cheole were selected so as to contain a pre-dominance of low socio-economic status students because these studentsare more sensitive to the influence of the school.] However it wasstill necessary to control for the socio-economic status, variationsamong the schools because as can be seen fram Table 2-1, there wereimportant socio-economic differences among the schools. Fred I.Greenberg concluded that lower socio-economic status elementary schoolstudents "show a greater deference toward political leadership; unlikeupper-status children they do not begin to display in sixth, seventh,and eighth grades a sense that political choices are theirs to make --that their judgments are worth acting upon."8 When Robert D. Hess andJudith V. Torney studied only white children they concluded thatsocial class differences in political orientations were minimal an0measured intelligence could explain the differences better. Theirdata, however, reveals clearly that even students of low measuredintelligence differ according to their social status. Political effi-cacy interest in goVernment, and political participation are all lowerfor the low status fifth and sixth grade student who has low measuredintelligence.9 Edward S. Greenberg also found that children of differ-ent social classes differed in their perception of the government.Lower class children viewed themselves as subjects of the governmentwhile middle class children saw themselves as participants in thegovernment.10

Control variable four was - the sex of the teacher. Each schoolwas assigned a percentage based on the proportion of male teachers Inthe fifth-grade classes. I found that when the students -ranked thepeople who taught them the most about being a good citizen, the teacherwas ranked above the parents. When I:broke:down this response by sexI found that the students ranked the mother first, followed by thefemale teacher, male teacher, and father. The minister, televisioniand books were ranked much lower. Given the sex- typing that createsdifferent role models for American males and females, I decided tocontrol for ghe sex of the teacher 11

Control variable five was the race of the interviewer. Each

155.

7f. Chapter One explains this point more fully.

8Fred I.,Greenstein, op. nit., p. 106.

1

11

Robert D. Hess and Judith V. Torney,

Fred

cit., pp. 150-1, 153,'

Greenstein, op. cit. pp. 159, 161.

Germaine Greer, The Female Eunuch (New York: McGraw-Hill,1971).

16

school was assigned a percentage based upon the number of classes inwhich.a Black man administered the Civic Education Questionnaire.In the rest of the classes the questionnaire was administered by aWhite man. Each interviewer was assigned an equal proportion ofpredominantly White and Black classes taught by either a Black orWhite teacher. I was controlling for a bias in the student responsedue to the race of the person administering the questionnaire.

William Brick and Lou Harris found a significant difference inquestionnaire responses due to the race of the interviewer.12 Alsosome psychological testing literature indicates a response bias due tointerviewer race.13

QUESTIONNAIRES

The Civic Education Questionnaire as shown in Appendix C wasadministered to 1027 fifth-grade students in 44 classrooms in 18elementary schools during Spring, 1970. The questionnaire was read tothe students who circled the appropriate response. The administrationtime was approximately 45 minutes.

This questionnaire shortened version of the one developed byRobert D. Hess and Judith V. Torney, measured five sets of questionsrelating to the student political self.14 The first three sets mea-sured student political orientations toward aspects of the Americanpolitical system: political community, regime, and authorities. Thefourth set measures student political knowledge and the fifth studentpolitical behavior.

The Organizational Climate Description Questionnaire, OCDQ, asshown in Appendix A was completed by 265. teachers in 18 elementaryschools. The questionnaire required approximately 20 minutes to com-plete. The OCDQ contains eight subtexts as shown in Appendix B.

12William Brink and Lou Harris, The Negro Revolution_ in America

(New York: Simon & Schuster, 1964).

13_Irwin Katz, J. N. Robinson, E. G. Epps, and Patricia Waly,

"The Effects of Race of Experitenter and Test Versus Neutral instruc-tions on Expressions of Hostility," Journal of Social Issues 20 (1964):54-59

14_

ment andThe Development of Basic Attitudes and Values Toward Govern-itizens urin t e ementary c-oo ears, a

Washington, D. C.: HEW, Office of Education, CRP - 1078, 1965).

17

The organizational climate of each school was measured by usingthe OCDQ developed by Andrew W. Halpin and Donald B. Croft. -5 Usingthe following method 1 obtained four factors and a factor score foreach school on each factor. First, I calculated an average score foreach teacher on each of the eight subtests.16 Second, using theaverage teacher scores, 1 calculated an average score for the schoolon each of the eight subtests. Third, 1 normatively standardized theeight subtest scores for the 18 schools using a mean of 50 and astandard deviation of 10 for each subtest.17 Fourth, 1 ipsativelystandardized each of the 18 schools' eight subtest scores using a meanof 50 and a standard deviation of 10 for each school.18 Normative andipsative standardization creates a double-centered matrix. When thismatrix is factor analyzed each factor identified can be related simul-taneously to each individual school and all of the ubtests of theOCDQ. Halpin and Croft borrowed this technique from Donald M. Brover-man.19 Fifth, applying a varimax rotational factor analysis to theeight double-standardized subtest scores, I identified four factorsof the elementary school's organizational climate. Sixth, for eachschool a factor score was calculated for each of the four factors.Each factor score indicates at which end of the factor the school islocated and how closely the school approaches the end of the factor. 20

15The Organizational. Climate of Schools Washington, D. C.

HEW, Office of Education, CRP-543, July, 1962).

16OCDQ questions 6, 10,_27, 55, and 65 were scored negatively,

, Appendix B.

17No Illative standardization standardizes one school's subtest

score in terms of the mean of all the other schools' score on the samesubtest. This method shows how one school's subtest score is related,either high, low, or the same, to the other schools' subtest scores.For a detailed discussion see Donald M. Broverman, "Normative andIpsative Measurement in Psychology," Psychological Review, 69 (July,1962): 295-305 and "Effects of Score Transformations in Q and RFactor Analysis Techniques,". Psychological Review, 68 (January,1961), 68-70.

18Ipsative standardization standardizes the eight school subtest

scores in terms of the mean of those eight subtest scores. Thismethod shows how each of the eight subtest scores are related, eitherhigh, low, or the same, to each other. For a detailed discussion seeDonald M. Braverman, op cit

19Cf. Andrew W. Halpin, Theory and Research in Administration

(New York: Macmillan, 1966), pp. 167-168.

20R. J. Rummel, Ailienalsis (Evanston: NorthwesternU.P., 1970), pp. 150-155.

18

C. ANALYSIS

The unit of analysis was the elementary school. I used a leastsquares delete computer program, LSDEL,21 to assess the contributionof the nine independent school variables to the dependent variable, astudent political orientation. The nine independent variables are:the four organizational climate factor scores and the five controlvariables -- teacher sex, interviewer race, student race, sex, andsocio-economic status. The dependent variable is the school averageresponse to a question from the Civic Education Questionnaire.

For each student political orientation the LSDEL computerroutine operated the following way: First, a multiple correlationcoefficient was computed between the orientation and the nine controlvariables. Second , the multiple correlation coefficient was testedfor significance using an analysis of variance test. Third, for eachcontrol variable's contribution to the multiple correlation coefficienta partial correlation coefficient was computed. Fourth, each partialcorrelation coefficient was tested for significance using an analysisof variance test. Fifth, assuming the deletion of one of the controlvariables, the percentage of variance explained by the rest of the con-trol variables is calculated. Sixth, the routine stopped if all thepartial correlation coefficients were significant at .05 or less. Ifthere were partial correlation coefficients significant at .051 orgreater then the control variable with the largest significance wasdeleted from the least squares equation. The routine was repeateduntil either all the control variables were deleted or those that re-mained had partial correlation coefficients that were significant at.05 or less.

21_-Mary E. Rafter and William L. Ruble, "Stepwise Deletion of

Variables from a Least Squares Equation," (East Lansing: MichiganState University, Agricultural Experiment Station, STAT Series Descrip-tion .No. 8. LSDEL, 1969.)

19

CHAPTER TH.

THE FOUR ORGANIZATIONAL IMATL .FACTORS

THE CONCEPT OF ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE

Even though all elementary school teachers are formally required.to perform the same task for each grade level due to a common curricula,they differ in the way they interpret this formal task. These differ-ences,are apparent when one visits the School And also when one visitsthe classroom. This research report in using the concept of organiza-tional climate focusses upon differences amongschools rather than:thedifferences among:classrooms within a school.

Since this exploratory-study assumes- that the political rule-model .oftheindividual teacher and the entire staff results from in-teractions with the rest of the. Members Of-theelementary school, under -.standing the school's organizational climate is-important. In order tounderstand the model that the teacher or the entire staff displays tothe-children in- the classrooms or school one needs to know-the organiza-tional setting inwhich-the teacher andstaff.interact.

An organizational setting-can influence the way that individualsperform given tasks as Renato Taiuri points-out

...climate and many related terms such as environment,situation, conditions, and circumstances have been widelyused to explain that a person or a group can behave invery different waysi even when faced with similar tasksand problems.)

The concept of organia ional climate is especially useful according toTagiuri "when it is desired to hold the-task constant and to expressthe character of-an enduring situation."2

The character of an enduring situation' can be specified bymaking .qualitative distinctions among similar organizations.

Quality is defined in terms of a set ofprice, workmanship, ingredients, but itof variables, e.g., price, workmanship,

variables, e.g.,is not the setingredients.

1Renato Tagiuri and George H. Litwin (ads

Climate (Cambridge: Harvard, 1968), p. 11.

-Ibid. pp. 22-234.

9d

izat onal

It is, rather, a configuration of values of such price,good workmanship, rare ingredients.3

This configuration of values Renato Tagiuri calls organizational cli-mate.

01inizational climate is a relative enduring quality of theinternal environment of an organization that (a) is experi-enced by its members, (b) influences-their behavior, and(c) can be described in terms of the values of a particularset of characteristics (or attributes) of the organization.4

Chris Argyris in studying a bank for a period of three years usedthe concept of organizational climate to explain the bank's configura-tion of formal organizational patterns, personnel personality variables,and informal organizational patterns. He defined organizational climateas, "the homeostatic state of an organization."5 Argyris predicted theorganizational climate would remain stable over time until change oc-curred in the conditions in which the organization operated and in thevalues of the personnel. Argyris in later studies has shown how organi-zational climate influences individual behavior and how the climate maybe changed.6

Francis G. Cornell, working independently of Argyris, examinedfour school systems and found that no two were alike in their organiza-tional climate and that these differences were more important in affect-ing teacher behavior than specific administrative acts related to thedaily operation of the organization. Cornell defined organizationalclimate as, "a delicate blending of interpretations by persons in theorganization of their jobs or roles in relationship to others and theirinterpretations of the roles of others in the organization."7 Cornelldid not relate teacher role interpretations to student role interpre-tations.

-Ibid., p. 27.

4Ibid.

5Chris Argyris, "Some Problems in Conceptualizing Organizational

Climate: A Case Study of a Bank," Administrative Science Quarterl2(1958), p. 516.

6Cf., Chris Argyris, Integratng the Individual andh22Lganiza-

tion (New York: Wiley, 1964) and Chris Argyris, Intervention aaand Method (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1970).

7

Francis G. Cornell, "Socially Perceptive Administration," ThePhi Delta 36 (March, 1955), p. 221.

21

Andrew W. Halpin and Donald B. Croft also viewed organizationalclimate in terms of the quality of interpersonal interactions in aporganization and describe organizational climate similar to the per-sonality of an individual. Their major contribution has been to developan operational definition of the elementary school organizational clim-ate with the Organizational Climate Description Questionnaire, OCDQ.

The OCDQ characterizes the organization of an elementary schoolby measuring teacher and administrator perceptions of their mutualinteractions. The OCDQ consists of eight subtests. Four of the sub-tests measure the teachers' perception of their interaction with otherteachers in terms of Disengagement, Hindrance, Esprit and Intimacy.The other four subtests for Aloofness, Production Emphases, Thrust,and Consideration, measure teachers' perceptions of the principal'sbehavior. The exact meaning of these eight subtests will be explainedlater in this chapter when I describe the four factors of the elemen-tary school organizational climate.

Andrew W. Halpin and Donald B. Croft using a varimax rotationalfactor analysis on the-eight subtest scores identified three factors ofthe elementary school organizational climate. These three factors'theycalled Authenticity, Satisfaction, and Leadership Initiation.9 Afterselecting those schools which loaded very high, either positively ornegatively, on one of the factors and very low on the other two factors;Halpin and Croft derived six organizational climates defined by a highloading on one of the factors. From Factor I, Authenticity, came theOpen and Closed climates; from Factor II, Satisfaction, came theControlled and Familiar climates, and from Factor III, LeadershipInitiation, came the Autonomous and Paternal Climates." The problemof this method. is that it uses only one of these three factors tocharacterize the school and ignores the other two. Examination of theHalpin-Croft data reveals that only one out of the seventy7one schoolsloaded high on one factor and near zero on the other two.11 The re-maining schools loaded at various levels on all three factors.. Thisprocedure discards a great deal of information which may be useful inexplaining the influence of the organizational climate on the students.

This may explain why John H. M. Andrews observed that "the over-all Climate does not, predict anything that the subtests do not predict

`Andrew W. Halpin and Donald B. Croft- The Or anizational Climateof Schools (Washington, D.C. HEW, Off1962).

9Ibid., pp. 95-102.

10cdreu W. Halpin, Theory and Research in Administration

New York: Macmillan, 1966), pp. 174-181organizational climates.

ce of Education, CRP-543, July,

11Ibid.,pp. 171-173.

22

for a description of the six

better."12 Andrews concluded that the OCDQ subtests "provide reason-ably valid measures of important aspects of the leadership_c4f the schoolprincipal in a perspective of interaction with his staff."1- Allan F.Brown and John H. House observed that of the over 100 studies using theOCDQ most have "uncritically accepted the instrument and the climates inthe original form."14

Rather than uncritically accept the Halpin-Croft organizationalclimates as valid I replicated their method on my OCDQ data. My repli-cation did not reveal the same three 'factors they identified as can beseen in Table 3-1 where the subtests loaded differently. This is notsurprising as the Halpin-Croft sample of schools was more White middleclass and non-urban than was mine. In replicating the Halpin Croftvarimax rotational factor analysis I noticed a fourth factor with eigenvalue greater than 1.0. Since this was the criterion that Halpih-andCroft had used in selecting factors, I used a four factor solution tothe varimax rotational factor analysis. Because the original organiza-tional climates as described by Halpin and Croft did not appear andbecause using a single dimension to define a school's organizationalclimate is too limited, bused a four factor description.

As shown in Table 3-2 each of the four factors contains two ofthe subtests and the four factors account for 83% of the variance inthe subtest scores of the eighteen schools. Table 3-3 shows the factorscore of each school on each factor. A factor score indicates at whichend of the factor dimension the school is located. Table 3-4 shows therelationship between the factor score and the school's subtest scorefor Factor T. I have not shown this relationship for Factors II, III,and IV because the pattern is the same. Factor I is characterized by ahigh loading of the subtests Disengagement and Esprit. At one end ofFactor I, the subtest Disengagement is positive and Esprit is negative;at the other end the opposite occurs. The factor score indicates wherean individual school is located on Factor I in terms of the high loadingsubtests. As can be seen the Disengagement subtest score is inverselyrelated to the Esprit subtest score. The factor score is also influ-enced by other subtest scores to the extent that they load on Factor Iwhich in this case was very low. The weight of the other subtest scoreswill cause the occasional lack of an inverse relationship between the

12John H. M. Andrews, "Some Validity Studies of the OCDQ," (Paper

read at the American Research Association, Chicago, February 10, 1963),'p. 37.

131bid., p. 38.

14Alan F. Brown and John H. House, "The Organizational Component

in Education," :Review of Educational Research, 37 (October, 1967) 0

p. 401.

23

TABLE 3-1

THREE-FACTOR VARTMAX ROTATIONAL SOLUTION FOR SUBTEST SCORES

BY SCHOOL HALPIN-CROFT N = 71; ARKLEY N = 18

FACTOR IOCDQ Subtest H-C A

1. Disengagement -.86* .82*

2. Hindrance -.13 .52

3. Esprit .79* -.73*

4. intimacy -.07 -.69*

5. Aloofness .08 .09

6. Production Emphasis -.16 -.00

Thrust .64* -.04

Consideration .02 -.19

Percentage c ofVariance .23 .25

24

FACTOR IIH-C A

FACTOR IIIH-C A

2h-

H-C A

.00 .30 -.33 -.00 .85 .76

.50* .67* .34 .21 .38 .76

-.28 -.12 -.04 .23 .71 .60

-.85* .49 .22 .11 .77 .72

-.09 -.00 .80* 3.78* .66 .61

.76* .03 .02 -.71* .61 .50

.08 -.86* -.47 .32 .64 , .85

-.07 -.47 -.85* .67* .73 .70

TotalVariance

.21 .22 .22 .67 .69

TABLE 3-2

FOUR-FACTOR VARIMAX ROTATIONAL SOLUTION FOR SUBTEST SCORES

BY SCHOOL N 18

FACTORS

OCDQ Subtest I III IV h2

1. Disengagement .91* .01 .06 .08 .84

Hindrance .50 -.21 .31 -.71* .89

Esprit -.81* ,.13 .06 -.14 .69

Intimacy -.43 .22 .73* -.09 .77

5. Aloofness -.05 -.94* -.13 .07 .91

6. Production Emphasis .27 -.21 .23 .85* .90

7. Thrust -.32 .32 -.81* .00 .86

. Consideration -.23 .79* -.32 -.02 .78

TotalVariancePercentage of

Variance .27 .22 .18 .16 .83

25

TABLE 3-3

SCHOOL FACTOR SCORES

School IFACTOR

IT III IV

1 .4493 1.3722 - .9955 .7845

2 -1.4948 - .4058 - .9218 .8068

3 .7335 .4288 .4370 1.9905

4 .8539 -1.0001 -1.9183 .0071

1.5481 - .2992 .8228 .8157

.2219 - .9810 -1.2597 - .1618

7 .8578 -1.2130 .7172 .1370

8 1.2882 1.4722 .1487 - 8611

9 -1.4604 .8665 1.0524 .2808

10 -1.7473 - .5424 .6312 .7396

11 .0551 - .2179 .6099 -1.9608

12 .1205 1.7553 1.2581 .3185

13 1.5008 .1410 .7314 .6669

14 .1586 .5556 -1.2235 -1.5159

15 .7271 -1.7375 .2293 .4301

16 - 1.1308 .1102 .1777 -1.6727

17 - .4270 -1.1693 1.3258 - .8220

18 - .0205 1.0848 -1.4674 .5837

26

TABLE 3-4

FACTOR I -- DISENGAGEMENT AND ESPRIT

School Factor Score Disengagement Score Esprit Score

5 1.5481 65.5 34.4

13 1.5008 59.6 35.9

8 1.2822 62.9 46.5

7 .8578 57.6 48.2

4 .8539 46.9 36.2

15 .7271 59.1 45.8

1 .4493 51.1 52.3

12 .1205 51.5 43.6

11 .0551 60.4 57.7

18 - .0205 42.8 47.1

14 - .1586 53.1 55.9

6 - .2219 45.8 37.8

17 - .4270 40.0 49.7

3 - .7335 47.0 52.4

16 -1.1308 34.4 55.4

9 -1.4604 42.1 62.5

-1.4948 34.5 64.0

10 -1.7473 31.5 61.4

27

subtests Disengagement and Esprit observed in Table 3-4. 1 5The sub-

tests that best define Factor I are those which load highest on FactorI and do not load very high on the other factors. Thus Disengagementand Esprit define Factor I better than the rest of the subtests and thefactor score best describes the extremeness of the inverse relationshipof,the subtests. The further the factor score deviates from zero themore the two subtest scores are deviating from their mean of 50. Thissame method I used to define the other three factors.

B. FACTOR I - SENSE OF ORGANIZATIONAL ATTACHMENT

Factor I is best defined by the subtests Disengagement and Espirtas shown in Table 3-2. The relationship of the subtests is inverse. Apositive factor score means that the teachers perceive Disengagement asvery frequently occurring and Esprit as rarely occurring, a negativescore means the opposite. Halpin and Croft have defined the subtexts asfollows:

Disengagement refers to the teachers tendency to be "notwith it." This dimension describes a group which is "goingthrough the motions," a group that is "not in gear" withrespect to the task at hand. It corresponds to the moregeneral concept of anomie as first described by Durkheim.In short this subtest focuses upon the teachers' behavior intask oriented situations.

Esprit refers to "morale.'' The teachers feel that theirsocial needs are being satisfied, and that they are, at thesame time, enjoying a sense of accomplishment in their job.16

In a negative factor score school, i.e., frequent Esprit andrare Disengagement, the teachers feel attached to the school. Theyperceive high morale and much school spirit as frequently occurring.Individually they spend time after school with the students, there isconsiderable laughter when they gather informally, and they accomplishtheir work with great vim, vigor and pleasure. They rarely talk aboutleaving and the school has no small cliques and no isolated permanentminorities. Teachers rarely ask the principal for special favors.17

15R. J. Rummel, Applied_ Factor Ally xis (Evanston: Northwestern

D.P., 1970), pp. 152-155.

16Andrew W. Halpin and Donald B. Croft, op. cit., p. 40.

17Cf., Appendix B for the OCDQ items that define Disengagement

and Esprit.

28

In a positive factor score school, i.e., requent Disengagementand rare Esprit, teachers feel no attachment to the elementary schoolorganization. Teachers frequently talk about leaving the school system,and the school has a permanent isolated minority and small cliques.Teachers stay by themselves and spend little time after school with stu-dents. Morale and school spirit are low and teaching is done with littlepleasure. 18

FACTOR II - LEADERSHIP INITIATION

Factor II is best defined by the subtests Aloofness and Consider-ation as shown in Table 3-2. The relationship of the subtests is in-'verse. A positive' factor score means that the teachers perceive Con-sideration as very frequently occurring and Aloofness as rarely occurring; a negative score means the opposite. Halpin and Croft have de-fined these subtests as follows:

Consideration refers to behavior by the principal which ischaracterized by an inclination to treat the "hu-manly," to try to do a little something extra for them inhuman terms.

Aloofness. refers to behavior by the principal which is Char-acterized as formal and impersonal, He "goes by the book"and prefers to be guided by rules and policies rather thandeal with the teachers in an informal, face-to-;face situa-tion. His behavior, in brief, is universal rather than par-ticularistic; nomothetic rather than idiosyncratic. Tomaintain this style, he keeps himself -- at least "emotion-ally" -- at a distance from his staffj9

The climate that my Factor II identifies is the same as the thirdfactor Identified by Halpin and Croft, Leadership Initiation. I haveused their name for the factor but have limited the scope of the factorto identifying one part of the school's organizational climate ratherthan characterizing the whole climate by one factor as theydo. Leader-ship Initiation refers to "the

0latitude within which the group members

a2can initiate leadership acts.

19Andrew W. Halpin an.d Donald B. Croft, op. cit,, p. 40.

20Andrew W. Halpin, op. cit.,

29

p. 192.

A positive factor score, i.e., rare Aloofness and frequentConsideration, means that the school has an organizational climatewhere teacher latitude to initiate leadership acts is quite rare.Halpin and Croft have called this climate Paternal.

The principal constrains the emergence of leadershipacts from the group and attempts to initiate most ofthese acts himself. In this instance the leadershipskills within. the group are not used to supplement theprincipal's own ability to initiate leadership acts.Consequently some required leaderShip acts are not evenattempted. 2

In the Paternal school the principal is the "big daddy" whofrequently helps teachers solve personal problems, does personal favorsfor them, stays after school to help them, settles their quarrels forthem, and selects courses which they will teach. Formal rules arerarely followed in interpersonal behavior, the faculty meetings seldomhave a tight agenda, the teachers frequently question the formal rulesbut the principal rarely contacts the teachers for advice.22 Thisis a school where a benevolent, considerate autocrat rules. In thisclimate the principal's authority rests upon particularistic norms.Each teacher is dependent upon the principal and thus views this rela-tionship as personal and special. Organizational problems are resolvednot in terms of formal procedureq but rather through informal specialprocedures. The role model that the students would observe in such asituation is one of powerful centralized authority figures who will dis-regard formal rules in response to a personal pleading.

A negative factor score, i.e., frequent Aloofness and rareC nsideration, means that the school has an organizational climate whereteachers have considerable latitude to initiate leadership acts. Halpinand Croft have termed this climate Autonomous:

This latitude is wide, but the freedom that this latitudeallows is not accompanied by sufficient direction andcontrol from the principal. (In other words, the principalhas not defined the structure, or the limits which themembers can feel free to attempt leadership acts.)23

21Ibid.

22Cf Appendix B for OCDQ items that define Aloofness and Con-

sideration.

23Andrew W. Halpin, , pp. 191-192.

30

Teachers have the opportunity to initiate leadership in the Autonomousschool because the principal asserts his influence over the schoolthrough formal rules rather than informal procedures. The formal rulesare rarely. questioned and faculty meetings are organized according to atight agenda and run in formal ways. However, the principal contactsthe teachers daily in a formal manner. The principal rarely helpsteachers solve personal problems, settles minor conflicts, or doespersonal favors for the teachers.24 The leadership pattern in theAutonomous climate instead of working through individualistic personalrelationships with the principal works through universalistic rules thatapply equally to ail. All teachers are treated as equals and the princi-pal is distant. Potentially the teachers have greater freedom withinthe classroom.

FACTOR III - SOURCE OF ORG fiIZATIONAL COHESION

Factor III is best defined by the subtests Intimacy and Thrust asshown in Table 3-2. The relationship of the subtests is inverse. Apositive factor score means that the teachers perceive Intimacy as veryfrequently occurring and Thrust as rarely occurring, a negative scoremeans the opposite. Halpin and Croft have defined the subtests as fol-lows:

Intimacy refers to the teachers' enjoyment of friendly-socialrelations with each other. This dimension describes a social-needs satisfaction which is not necessarily associated withtask-accomplishment.

Thrust refers to behavior by the principal which is character-ized by his evident effort in trying to "move the organiza-tion." "Thrust" behavior is marked not by close supervision,but by the principal's attempt to motivate the teachersthrough.example which he personally sets. Apparently, becausehe does not aak teachers to give of themselves any more thanhe is willing to give of himself his behavior, though starklytask- oriented is nonetheless viewed favorably by the teachers.25

The climate factor that Factor III identifies is the degree ofintegration between the task goals of the school and the need of theteachers t© be part of a group. As the Hawthorne experiments in the1920's indicated it is possible for an organization member to satisfy

24Cf., Appendix B.for the OCDQ items that define Aloofness and

Consideration.

25Andrew L,. Halpin and Donald B. Croft, op cit., 40.

31

his need to belong to a group indepeent of the organizational taskgoals.26 Frederick Herzberg has su sted that the two are independentin all organizations while Chris ArLgris argues that the independenceis due to organizational structure. Whether or not these factors areactually independent or just the result of organizational structure isan issue that needs no final settlement here. I believe however thatArgyris' position explains the issue more fully. What I am interestedin is the effect of the separation or integration of these factors uponthe role model that the teachers display to students.

In the school with a positive factor score, i.e., frequentIntimacy and rare Thrust, individual social needs satisfaction is seenby the teachers as independent of task accomplishment. This is a schoolwhere 'hygienic factors" predominate: it is a pleasant place to spendtime.28 The teachers frequently invite other faculty members to visitthem at home, know much about the family background and personal lifethe other teachers, and have frequent fun socializing together duringschool time. The principal rarely presses the teachers about theirteaching jobs and rarely tells them of new ideas he has found or setsan example by working hard himself. He is also unconcerned about thepersonal problems of the teachers as these are handled by the teachersas a group.29

In the school with a negative factor score, i.e., rare Intimacyand frequent Thrust, the principal is the source of organizational cohe-sion. In this climate the principal frequently sets an example byworking hard himself. The principal is in constant contact with theteachers, frequently telling them of new ideas, helping them, and usingconstructive criticism. The cohesion that the principal creates iscentered around the task of teaching. Teacher interactions are notvery personal. It is rare that teachers invite each other to theirhomes, know each other's family background, and talk about each other'spersonal life. There Is little fun socializing during school time.This is a climate that is all business and coolly professional.3°

26Charles Ferrow, Complex Organizations (Glenview, Illinois:

Seott, Foresman, 1972),, chp. 3.27

f., Frederick Herzberg, Work and the Nature of Ma.n (Cleveland:World, 1966) and Chris Argyris, InIesmIingn2LInAiyidual and the Or-ganization (New York: Wiley, 1964).

Herzberg, opcit.2

29Cf., Appendix B for the OCDO items that define Intimacy and

Thrust.3°Ibid.

32

E. FACTOR IV ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE

Factor IV is best defined by the subtests Production Emphasisand Hindrance as shown in Table 3-2. The relationship of the subtestsis inverse. A positive factor score means .that the teachers perceiveProduction Emphasis as very frequently occurring and Hindrance as rare-ly occurring, a negative factor score means the opposite. Halpin andCroft have defined the subtests as follows:

Production Em hasie refers to behavior by the principal whichis characterized by close supervision of the staff. He ishighly directive, and plays the role of a "straw boss." Hiscommunication tends to go in only one direction, and he isnot sensitive to feedback from his staff.

Hindrance refers to the teachers' feeling that the principalburdens them with routine duties, committee demands, andother requirements which the teachers construe as unnecessarybusywork. The teachers perceive that the principal is hin-dering rather than facilitating their work.31

Factor IV identifies the organizational structure of the elementaryschool in terms of role definitions and the locus of decision-making.In my sample of schools, diffuse roles are associated with centralizeddecision-making and specific roles with decentralized decision-making.

In a school with a positive factor score, i.e., frequentProduction Emphasis and rare Hindrance, teachers' rules are not speci-fied by formal rules and procedures. Teachers have few committee assign-ments, few routine duties, and little burdensome administrative paperwork. The principal makes most of the.decisions concerning the opera,tion of the school. Frequently the principal makes all the class schedul-ing decisions and schedules the work of the teachers. The principalfrequently checks the subject matter ability of the teachers and makessure that teachers work to their full capadity. In this school theteachers are controlled by the principal with few specified rules andprocedures.32

In a school with a negative factor score, i.e., rare ProductionEmphasis and frequent Hindrance, teachers' rol s are specified byformal rules and proCedures. The teachers have many committee require-ments, routine duties are seen as interfering with the teaching role,

'Andrew W. Halpin and Donald B.. Croft, op. cit., p. 40.

32Cf., Appendix B for the QCDQ items that define Production

Emphasis and Hindrance.

and they never seem to have sufficient time to prepare administrativereports such as student progress reports. Yet within this rolespecific organization, decision-making is decentralized with the princi-pal rarely making all the class scheduling decisions. The principalrarely schedules the work for the teachers. The principal generallyleaves the teachers -lone. He infrequently checks upon the subjectmatter ability of the teachers and rarely attempts to see if theteachers are working to full capacity. The teachers are controlledthrough formal rules and procedures and the principal is personallynon-directive.33

Rather than speculate about all the possible political .rolemodels in each of the four organizational climate factors I decidedfirst see what student orientations and behavior were statistically re-lated to the factors. As can be seen in the next three chapters Ihave then attempted to make some-tentative conclusions about those,organizational climate factors that seem to have political rolemodels that are related to student political orientations and behavior.

Tbid.

34

CHAPTER POUR

TEACHERS. A ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE FACTORS

One way the student can be influenced by the elementary school'sorganizational climate factors is through the behavior of their teach-er. I have assumed that the elementary school teachers reflect theorganizational climate factors, in their role behavior and the modelthat they display before the students. Before I can discuss whetheror not particular teacher roles are associated with particular studentpolitical orientation, I must determine that the students perceive theteacher as a significant influence on political learning. First, theremust be an identification between the teacher and the student at leastas strong as that between the parents and the students, for much evi-dence indicates that parents are important socialization agents.' Myresearch as shown in Table 4-1, reveals that the teacher is rated bythe students at the same level as their parents in their.influence inteaching the student about citizenship.

. Second, I must determine if there are any organizational climatefactors related to student perceptions of teacher citizenship.influence.The least squares deletion routine revealed that only Factor II,Leadership Initiation, and student race could significantly explain -thevariance in the responses to the-question-"How Much does your teacher.teach.. you about being a good. citizen?"2 The multiple correlation coef-ficient is .83 with a E. of .69. The over-all analysis of variance-issignificant at < .0005.-- .The partial correlations and their signifi-cance levels are:

1. Factor II, Leadership Initiation .61 at .0092 Proportion of Black Students in Class -.77 at < .0005

Thus in a Factor -II organizational climate the teacher is per-calved by the Students as influential in teaching them to be goodcitizens. The teacher in an Autonomous climate is perceived by thestudents as having more influence than the teacher in- the Paternalclimate. In the Autonomous climate the teacher is able to make moredecisions independently of the Principal and power is more decentral-ized than in the Paternal climate. Also Black students are moresensitive to teacher citizenship influence than site students. So Ican conclude that Black students in Autonomous climates are the group

1Herbert Hirsch, Poverty and Politicization (New York: Free

Press, 1971), chp. 4.

2Appendix C, Civic Education Questionnaire, question 41.

35

TABLE 4-1

RANK OF THOSE WHO TEACH THE STUDENTTO BE A GOOD CITIZEN

"How Much Does the Following Person or Thing TeachYou About Being a Good Citizen?"

(1 Teaches me an awful lot)(5 = Does not teach me at all)

Rai* Person- r Thing Mean

1 Mother 1.73

Teacher 1.86

Mother and Father 2 04

4 Father 2.34

5 Minister

6 Books 2.99

7 Television 3.12

Friends 4.25

most influenced by the teacher and White students in Paternal climatesare the least influenced as shown in Table 4-2.

The students were asked to be more specific about their percep-tions of the teacher's role. They were asked about three dimensionsof the teacher's role: benevolence, infallibility and punitive power.As shown in_ Tables 4-3 and 4-4 the students rated the teacher at thesane level as their parents in benevolence and infallibility. But asshown in Table 4-5 the teacher was perceived as having more punitivepower than the parents. In terms of role attributes the students per-ceive the parents and the teachers as similar in terms of affectivequalities but as dissimilar in terms of the power of the role occupants.The teacher was perceived as more powerful than the parents.

Four variables were revealed by the least squares deletion rou-tine that could significantly explain the variance in student percep-tion of teacher benevolence. Students` were asked to "Think of theirteacher as she or he really is...from "Would always want to help me ifI needed it" to "Would not usually want to help me if I needed it."3The multiple correlation coefficient of the four variables .92 with aR2 of .84. The over-all analysis of variance is significant at <.0005. The partial correlations and their significance levels are:

1. Factor III, Source of Social Cohesion .71 at .0032. Socio-economic Status of Student .52 at .0453. Proportion of Black Students in Class -.85 .at <-00054. Proportion of Boys in Class .72 at .002

The potential for a teacher to serve as an effective role modelis increased when the students perceive the teacher as benevolent.Several factors contribute to a student's perceiving benevolence in ateacher. According to my findings the optimum conditions in low socio-economic status elementary schools exist in those schools where teach-ers integrate the school task goals and the teachers' need to belong toa group. If this school also contains upper socio-economic status stu-dents who are Black and female, such students will be more likely tosee their teacher as benevolent. The school with the lowest perceptionof teacher benevolence would be one where the teachers separate satis-faction of social belonging needs from school task goals. The studentswould be of lower socio-economic status, White and male.

It would seem that Black, upper eoci&-economic Status femalesare perceiving their teachers as helpful when the teachers haveaccepted the task goals of the school.-: White, lower socio-economic

.

status males have the lowest perception of teacher benevolence whenthe teachers-haVe not accepted the task goals of the school. When the

Ibid., question 44.

37

TABLE 4-2

TEACHER CITIZENSHIP INFLUENCEIN FACTOR Il CLIMATE AND RACIALLY DIFFERENT CLASSES

"How Much Does Your Teacher TeachYou About Being a Good Citizen?"

(1= She teaches me an awful lot)(5 She does not teach me at all)

Mean Score

Racial Proportion of Class

Factor IILeadershipInitiation

NegativeFactorScore(Autonomous

PositiveFactorScore(Paternal)

Black (40-100%)

1.58

1.86

Black (0-40%

2.25

2.33

38

TABLE 4-

RANK OF BENEVOLENCE OF AUTHORITY FIGURES AND INSTITUTIONS

(1 = Always want to help me if I needed it)(6 = Would not usually want to help me if I needed it)

Ran Mean

1 Mother 1.47

2 Teacher 2..05

Mother and Father 2.07

4 Policeman 2.38

Father 2.68

Supreme Court 3.21

7 Government 3.51

President 3.84

39

TABLE 4-4

RANK OF INFALLIBILITY OF AUTHORITY FIGURES AND INSTITUTIONS

Rank

(1 = Almost never makes mistakes)(6 Almost always makes mistakes

Authvity Figure or Institution

Mother 2.65

2 Supreme Court 2.73

3 Policeman 2.88

4 Cover ent 2.90.

5 'Teacher 2.90

6 Mother and Father 3.03

7 Father 3.41

President 4.20

TABLE 4-5

RANK OF PUNITIVE POWER OF AUTHORITY FIGURES

(1 = Can punish anyone)(6 = Can puni6n no one)

Rank AuthorlyFallEtclEEREion

1 Supreme Court

2 Policeman

Government

4 Teacher

5 President

Mother

7 Mother and Father

8 Father

41

INSTITUTIONS

Mean

3.24

3.27

3.51

4-00

4.16

4.68

4.83

4.98

teacher presents a role model of accepting the task goals of anorganization, the Black female of upper socio - economic status is themost likely to perceiVe the teacher as helpful. The task goal seemsto be that of helping the Black female upper socio-economic statusstudent and of not helping the White male lower socio-economic statusstudent,

The students in all the schools perceive the teacher and theParents as having the same level of infallibility. Students were askedto think of their parents and the teacher as he or she really is. Ifthey thought them to be infallible they responded "Almost never makesmistakes," if fallibile "Almost always makes mistakes."4 My researchas shown in Table 4-4 indicates that the students perceive the teacherand the parents as having the same level of infallibility. A rolemodel believed to make few mistakes is one more likely to be imitated.

The least squares-deletion routine revealed that two organiza-. tional cliMate'factors are related to:student-perceptions of teacherinfallibility, Factor III,. Leadership Initiation and Factor III,Source of Social Cohesion. The multiple correlation coefficient- ofthese two factors is .66 with a R2-of .44. The over-all analySis ofvariance is significant at .013. The partial correlations and theirsignificance level's are:

1. Factor II, Leadership Initiation -.51 at .0362. Fadtor III, Source of Social Cohesion -.55 at .023

Table 4-6 indicates that in a Paternal climate school whereneed to belong to a social group is independent of the school taskgoals, the students perceive their teachers as making many mistakes.In an Autonomous climate where group bblonging needs are integratedwith organizational task goals, the students perceive their teachers asmaking few mistakes. Here we have some evidence that the or

climate is related to the teacher model that the student observes.In the Paternal and non-integrated climate the teachers probablymake many mistakes in terms of the school because he has not inte-grated the school task goals into his own behavior. Also, because ofthis low integration the Principal needsiconstantly to supervise theteachers, though in a personal way since the rules of the school arenot seen as relevant.

The students in all the schools perceive the teacher as havingmore punitive power than their parents as shown in Table 4-5. Studentswere asked to think of their:parents and teacher as he or she really is.If they perceived them high in punitive power they marked "Can punishanyone." If the student perceived little pUnitive power they marked

Ibid. ques --s 16, 45, and 70.

42

TABLE 4-6

TEACHER INFALLIBILITYIN FACTOR II AND FACTOR III CLIMATES

"Think of Your Teacher as He Really Is...

(1 = Almost never makes mistakes)(6 = Almost always makes mistakes)

Mean Score

FACTOR II, Leadership Initiation

Positive FactorScore (Paternal)

Negative FactorScore (Autonomous)

PositiveFactorScore 3.08 2.96(Non-integrated)

Factor IIISource ofSocialCohesion Negative

FactorScore 2.93 2.67(Integrated)

43

"Can punish no one. "5 These findings confirm that the student in lowsocio-economic status schools are more sensitive to the influence ofthe sohoOl, as I dieCussed in Chapter One. However no organizationalclimate factor significantly explained the variance in student per-ceptions of the teacher's punitive power.

One can assume.that the organizational climate influences teach-,er behavior which in turn creates a model that the students observe.Using thiS approach,- the only.Factor II, Leadership. Initiation-and.Factor III, Source of Social Cohesion can be considered as climateswhich would, have a potential influence upon student political orienta-tions.

5Ibid. questions 17, 46, and 71.

44

CHAPTER FIVE

STUDENT POLITICAL ORIENTATIONS AND BEHAVIOR

A. INTRODUCTION

The political orientations and behaviors that the elementaryschool student acquires will define his "political self." This con-cept, adapted by Richard E. Dawson and Kenneth Prewitt from GeorgeH. Mead's notion of the "social self," according to Dawson and Prewittrefers to the individual's "entire complex of orientations regardinghis political world, including his views toward his own politicalrole. "1 Through a process of political socialization every individualacquires .a political self in which he "acquires a complex of beliefs,feeling, and information which help him to comprehend, evaluate, andrelate to the political world around him."2

Gabriel A. Almond and Sidney Verba have identified three typesof political selves: parochial, subject, and participant.3 They wereable to relate subject and participant orientations to school author-ity patterns as discussed in Chapter One Edward S. Greenburg verytentatively concluded that elementary student political orientations,"would appear to point to a kind of 'participant' orientation amongwhite students and 'subject' orientation among black students."4

Having a subject political orientation means the individualviews himself as a passive member of the political system, one whoaccepts all decisions as legitimate and never attempts to influencethose who make the authoritative decisions for the entire society.An individual with a participant political orientation views himselfas an active member of the political system. This person does not

1Richard E. Dawson and Kenneth Prewitt, Political Socialization

(Boston: Little, Brown.1969), p. 17.

2Ibid.

3Gabriel A. Almond and Sidney Verba, The Civic Culture (Prince-

ton: Princeton U.P., 1963), pp. 11-20.

4Edward S. Greenberg, "Political Socialization to Support of

the System: A Comparison of Black and White Children," (Ph.D. Disserta-tion, University of Wisconsin, 1969) : P. 128.

45

accept all decisions as legitimate and makes many attempts to influ-ence those who make the authoritative decisions for the entire society.

The Civic-Education Questionnaire measures sets of studentpolitical orientations Sets one, two, and orientationstoward theAmeridan .political system, community,:regime, and-authori--tieS. Set four measure student political knowledge. Set five meas-ures student politicalbehavior. All the responses to these five Setscan be classified as either a subject-or participant orientation. Ifthe schOol:organizationalclimate factor is related -to studentpoliti-cal orientations, I would expect that the climates in which theteachers were subjects. in their-own school organizationwould createeither-a subject or participant model which the students would observeand transfer to political Objects. This model could be either theindividual teacher or the entire school. Factor I, Sense of Organiza-tional AttachmentandFactor IV; Administrative Structure, were re-lated to individual teacher models; while Factor II, LeadershipInitiation, and Factor III, Source of Social Cohesion-, were related toschool models.

B. SET ONE - POLITICAL COMMUNITY

David Easton and Robert D. Hess defined the political communityas, "the members of a society looked upon as a group of persons who'seek to solve their problems in common through shared political struc-ture."5 The relationship of the child's attachment to the politicalcommunity to subject and participant political orientations has neverbeen directly examined. However those students who will eventuallybecome participants in the political process seem to have greaterattachment, while those who will eventually become subjects in thepolitical process seem to have less attachment. The Hess-Torney studyfound much higher and more persistent sense of attachment to thepolitical community when examining predominantly white middle to uppersocio-economic status students.6 The Hirsch and Greenberg studies oflow socio-economic status students, both White and Black, found lowerand less stable attachment to the political community-7

5David Easton and Robert D. Hess, "The Child's Political World,"

Midwest Journal of Political Science 6 (August, 1962), p. 233.

6Robert D. Hess and Judith V. Torney, T122)tyeinent_pf Politi-

cal Attitudes in Children .(Chicago: Aldine, 1967), claps. 2, Appen-dix B.

7Herbert Hirsch, Poverty and Politicization (New York: Free

Press, 1971), and Edward S. Greenberg, 2,21-.2

46

In my study the four organizational climate factors were notsignificantly, related to student attachment to the political communityas indicated bX responses to the question, "America is the best countryin the world." ° The. least. squares deletion .revealed that only thestudent racial proportion of the classroom could significantly accountfor the differences among the schools. The correlation coefficient was.57 explaining -33%-of the variance with- a significance of .013. As theproportion of Black students increased in the' class, the more negativethe response to the question, "America is the best country in the

Socio- economic status was not significantly :related to thestudent responses. my finding would support Greenberg's that Blackstudent attachment to the political community was .lower than White bythe fifth-grade.9

I have concluded that school organizational climate does notaffect the student's attachment to the political community but thatthe racial composition Of the school does. Racial segregation hasdifferdnt effects depending on the segregated race. Black segregationis associated with a low feeling of attachment to the political com-munity, while White segregation is associated with a high feeling ofpolitical attachment.

SET TWO - POLITICAL REGIBE

According to Easton and Hess the political regime is:"

The-slower changing formal and informal-structuresthrough which the decisions (of the political authorities).are taken and administered, together with the rules of thegameer codes of behavior that legitimate the actions ofpolitical-authorities and specify what is expected ofcitizens or subjects.1°

A pa ticipation orientation to the political regime would perceivepolitical structure and the related norms as allowing much citizeninvolvement in the decision-making process. A participant would alsoperceive rules and laws as flexible and would believe thatindividualscan influence the decision-making process, i.e., a sense of politicalefficacy. A subject orientation would be the opposite.

Appendix C, Civic Education Questionnaire,question 5.9Edward S. Greenberg, op. cit., pp. 107 -110.

10David Easton and Robert D. Hess, op. cit., p. 233.

47

Factor I, Sense of Organizational Attachment, was the onlyorganizational climate factor that showed a consistent but weak rela-tionship with the questions dealing with summary evaluations of thepolitical regime. In both cases the greater the teacher's sense ofattachment to the elementary school the greater the student attachmentto:the political regime.

Factor I and student socio-economic status best explained thevariance in the question,- "I thihk what goes on in the government isall for the best."11 The Multiple correlation coefficient was .57explaining 33% of the variance with an over7all significance of .051.The partial correlations and their significance levels are:

1. Factor I, Sense of Organizational Attachment .50 at .0412. Student Socio7Economdc Status .42 at .091

Thus in the schools where the teachers' sense of attachment to theschooLwas high and where there was a predominance of_ low socio-economic status students I found:the highest summary evaluation ofthe political regime as shown in Table 571. The low socio-economicstatus students are more sensitive to the organizational climate ofthe schools and thus they are most influenced by the school model thatthey observe.

A similar but weaker relationship concerning Factor I was alsofound in the responses to the question, "All laws are fair."12 Thepartial correlation of Factor I to the question was .09 significantat .77. Again where teachers' sense of attachment to the school washigh the students perceived laws as being fair, another indicator ofregime attachment. When the students observe teachers who are attachedto the school organization, they seem to pick this up and transfer itto the political regime. However Factor I was the only factor thathad even a weak relationship to student political orientations.

. . The two best predictors of the school.differenaes in thestudent orientations to the.politicalregime were the -class racialproportions and the sex of the classroom teacher. The multiple corre-lation coefficient for student. perception of the effectiveness oflaws, whether "people who break laws get caught or-get away,"13. was.88 explaining 77% of the school variance with a significance of -<.-0005.The independent effects of class racial proportions and sex of teacherwill be discussed beloW. However as seen' in Table 5 -2 it is apparent

11Appendix C, Civic Education Questionnaire, question 18.

12ibid.- question 49.

31bid. question 21.

TABLE 5-1

STUDENT EVALUATION OF THE POLITICAL REGIME

"I think what goes on in the government isall for the best)

(1 = Yes!! Yea!!)(5 = No!! No!!)

Mean Score

School S i o- Economic Status

High(NegativeFactorScore)

Factor I,Sense ofOrganizationalAttachment Low

(PositiveFactorScore)

Low High(SES Score .38-.49) (SES Score .51-.61)

49

2.59 2.69

2.82 2.96

TABLE 5-2

STU_ f PERCEPTION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF LAWS

"What do you think is the most true?"

(1 People who break laws AlwAyA_Et_paught)(4 People who break laws always_ get away)

RacialProportionof Class

Mean Score

Sex of Fifth Grade Teachers

Female Male(67-100%) (67-100%)

Black(40-100%) 2.25 2.60

Black(0-40%) 1.68 2.00

50

that the students in the predominantly Black schools with male teach-ers perceive the laws of the regime as ineffective and thoSe in thepredominantly White schools with female teachers see the laws as ef-fective.

The greater the number of Black students the lower was attach-ment to the political regime. Black students thought it was true that"people who break laws usually or always got away," with a partialcorrelation of .87 with a significance of < .0005. They also believedthat disobeying their parents was worse than disobeying the teacher ora policeman,14 with correlation coefficient of -.72 with a signifi-cance of .001. White students perceive political regime, attachment inthe opposite direction.

When the proportion of white students increases a subject orien-tation appears in a feeling that all laws are enforced and that dis-obedience of non-family authority figures is bad. The predominantlyBlack classes seem to have some participant orientation in terms of arealization that all laws are not enforced and thus the regime isapparently sensitive to some pressures that result in differing policyresponses. However Black stucl&nts' feeling that the worst disobedienceis failure to obey one's parents indicates a lack of attachment to thepolitical regime. This lack of attachment plus the low regard forthe efficiency of the legal system indicates possibly the growth ofpolitical cynicism, a different kind of subject orientation in that ithas the potential for political activism.

The sex of the teacher also predicted the school variance inresponses to two questions relating to an evaluatibn of the performanceof the political regime. The questions tapped perceptions of fairnessof laws and whether or not people who broke the laws got caught. Thesex of the classroom teacher was the only variable that explainedschool differences in perceptions of the fairness of laws, I5 a correla-tion coefficient of 7.49 significant at .049. The sex of the-classroomteacher also explained along with the class racial proportion studentperceptions of the effectiveness-of laws016 a partial correlation coef-ficient of .52 significant at .031. The male teachers seem to beteaching a subject orientation in that the students in their classesperceive laws as fair but that people who break these fair laws getaway. The female teacher's students seem to have a more participantorientation seeing laws as unfair and people being caught. All thatI can conclude here is that the teachers differ in orientations

14Ibid., question 20.

15Ibid., question 49.

16Ibid. question 21.

51

according to sex and this is being transferred to political objects.But until a closer analysis of male and female teachers is done,this is merely speculation.

The students were also asked questions about the politicalefficacy, 17 the meaning of democracy, 18 the permanence of law,19 andhow they would respond to a policeman who was doing something wrong, 2Qbut none of the control variables nor the organizational climatefactors could explain the differences among the schools.

My finding indicates that as student orientations toward thepolitical regime become more conceptually abstract the effect of theschool becomes less. School organizational climate factors and schoolrelated factors such as racial proportion and the sex of the teachercould explain school differences only for relatively simple orienta-tions toward the political regime. Yet for political efficacy, themeaning of democracy, the permanence of law, and response to a police-man who was doing something wrong, no school factor could explain thedifferences. It is possible that these orientations will develop laterin age, or it is possible that these orientations are the result ofthe low socio-economic status environment of the entire sample andthat the differences I am measuring are trivial.

D. SET THREE POLITICAL AUTHORITIES

According to Easton and Hess the political authorities are theoccupants of those roles through which the day-to-day formulationadministration of binding decisions for a society are undertaken." 41The political authorities represent the current government. The stu-dents were asked about the authorities seen as_persons, like' thePresident and the policeman, and about authorities seen as institutions,like the Supreme Court- and the Government.

ofClimate

factors are related to student perceptions -of personal school author-ity, the teacher. Factor II, Leadership initiation, and Factor III,Source of Social Cohesion, are related to student perceptions of teach-er benevolence and. infallibility as explained in Chapter-Four. If

17Ibid., questions 12, 30, 31, 72, and 73.

18ibid,, questions 55, 56, 57, 59, and 60.

19Ibid., question 11.

20Ibid., question 64.

21David Easton and Robert B. Hess, p. 233.

interpersonal transfer is occurring then I would expect these roleattributes to be transferred to political authorities, most likelythe personal ones because they resemble the teacher, less likely theinstitutional authorities. Factor I, Sense of Organizational Attach-ment, and Factor IV, Administrative Structure, would most likely berelated to institutional political authorities because they areassociated with school role models.

1. Benevolence

Authority figure benevolence was measured by asking the studentto think of an authority figure, either a person or an institution, asit really is and how much it would help them if they really neededit.22 Students perceived their teacher as most helpful in a climatewhere the teachers had integrated their need to belong to a group withthe job of teaching. But this feeling of benevolence was not trans-ferred to political authorities. Although all the correlation coef-ficients were in the predicted direction not one significantly ex-plained the school.differences. Thus I would conclude that althoughFactor III, Source of Social-Cohesion, will predict how students per-ceive teacher benevolence, this perception is only very weakly trans-ferred to political objects.

For orientations toward the President and Government no controlvariable nor organizational climate factor explained the school differ-ences. Only class racial proportion explained student perceptions ofpoliceman benevolence with a correlation -coefficient of .61 signifi-cant at .007. A8 the number of Black students increased the perceptionof the policeman's benevolence increased.

Edward S. Greenberg found that low socio-economic status child-ren see the policeman as the representative of the political systemswhile higher socio-economic status children see the President in thatrole. Greenberg found that the low socio-economic status child, al-though more afraid of the political system, attributes the highestbenevolence to the policeman, an authority who represents the politicalsystem. 23 Thus it would appear that the Black students in my study,rate the policeman high in benevolence because they fear this symbolof the American government: they feel vulnerable.

In analyzing the meaning of a high benevolence rating, it isdifficult to separate those perceptions in which the child is saying,"This authority figure really wants to help me," and those where thechild is saying, "1 am scared and I hope he will help me." In the

22-Appendix C, ivic.Educa ion-Questionnaire, questions 8, 15,

44, 52, 61, and 69.

23Edward'. Greenberg, op. cit., pp. 211-219.

53

case of the teacher I think the child sees the benevolence as theformer because the child rates the parents at the same level ofbenevolence. In the case of the policeman, I would agree with DavidEaston and Robert D. Hess that:

Confronted with the pervasive and inescapable authority ofadults, and realistically aware of /his own helplessness andvulnerability, the child must seek some congenial form ofaccommodation. . By idealizing authority and by actuallyseeing it as benign, soliticious and wise, the child isable to allay the fears and anxieties awakened by his owndependent state. A potentially threatening figure is con-veniently transformed into a protector.24

Because of the two possible meanings of benevolence to the child Iwould expect the children who perceive a teacher to be benevolent to beless likely to rate political authorities as benevolent. An examina-tion of my data found this to be true for the President and the police-man who are both negatively correlated with teacher and parent benevo-lence. But it is not true for the Supreme Court and the Governmentwhich are positively correlated. I would conclude that low socio-economic status students perceive the President and policeman as threat-ening and the Supreme Court and government as not. This may also indi-cate that these students are perceiving only personal authority figuresbut not institutional authority figures as threatening.

Perceptions of Supreme Court benevolence were explained by.threevariables as revealed by the least squares deletion routine. Themultiple correlation coefficient is .67 explaining 45% of the variancewith a significance of .034. The partial correlations and their levelsof significance are:

1. Factor II, Leadarship Initiative .53 at .0372. Factor IV, AdTainistrative Structure -.54 at .0323. Proportion of Boys in Class -.56 at .025

The relationship between Factor II and Factor IV is that whenthe teachers are decentralized in their teaching function and central-ized in the support, functions, the students perceive the Supreme Courtas benevolent. The teacher is most likely to be perceived as benevo-lent in this climate as shown in Table 5-3, so there seems to be atransfer to the Supreme Court. However when the teachers are central-ized in their teaching, they probably have to follow a common curricula,and the school is administratively decentralized the students perceivethe Supreme Court as less benevolent.benevolent in this climate as shown inthat teacher benevolence is only transobjects.

The teacher is seen as lessTable 5-3. Thus it would appearerred to institutional political

24David Easton and Robert D. Hess, sp. ci

54

p. 243.

TABLE 5-3

TEACHER BENEVOLENCEIN FACTOR II and IV CLIMATES

"Think of Your Teacher As She Really is..."

(1 Would always want to help me if I needed it)(6 Would not usually want to help me if I needed it)

Mean Score

Factor II, Leadership Initiation

Positive

Negative FactorScore (Autonomous)

Positive FactorScore (Paternal

Factor 1.65 2.32Score(PersonalControl)

Factor IVAdministrativeStructure

NegativeFactorScore 2.30 2.22(RuleControl)

55

2. Infallibility

Although Factor II, Leadership Initiation and Factor III,Source of Social Cohesion could predict student perceptions of teacherinfallibility, i.e., the possibility of making mistakes, neither ofthese factors were associated with student perceptions of politicalauthority infallibility. Instead the racial composition of the classpredicted the school differences. As the proportion of Black students-in the class increased the feeling increased that the President,Supreme Court, policeman, and government made mistakes.25 The correla-tion coefficients and their significance levels were as follow .

1. President .63 at .0052. Supreme Court .53 at .016

Policeman .76 at .00054. Government .45 at .058

There was no relationship between the racial composition of theclass and perceptions of teacher infallibility. Thus how the childrenperceived the teacher had no bearing on ho they perceived politicalauthorities: no observational learning nor interpersonal transfer isoccurring. Instead I found that Black children saw the politicalauthorities as making many mistakes and White children saw them asmaking few mistakes.

Punitive Power

The punitive power of political authorities was measured byasking the students about the number of people that the authority couldpunish, from no one to anyone. If observational learning was occurringone would expect that in those schools where the punitive power of theteacher was perceived as great this perception would be transferred tothe political authorities. In no school were student perceptions ofthe teacher's punitive power explained by the school's organizationalclimate factors or the control variables. Thus there was no possibil-ity for interpersonal transfer to occur.

The correlation coefficients, only one of which is significant,showed a weak relationship between Factor IV, Administrative Structureto student perceptions of the punitive power of the President, SupremeCourt, policeman, and government.26 The correlation coefficients andthe levels of significance are as follows:

25Appendix C, Civic Education Questionnaire, questions 9, 33,

53, and 62.

26Ibid. questions 10, 34, 54, and 63.

56

1. President .32 at .2502. Policeman .28 at .2823. Government .05 at .8874. Supreme Court .57 at .021

The school where the principal was the boss was the schoolwhere political authorities were seen as having the ability to punishanyone. In the school where the authority of the principal was decen-tralized, political authorities were seen as having less punitivepower. This relationship was the strongest for the Supreme Court.Apparently what is happening here is that the students are observingthe entire school as a model. The centralized model is seen as havinggreat punitive power, possibly because the principal makesiall theadministrative decisions. The basis for authority is not rule-based butpersonally based. Punitive power apparently is being perceived asbased upon personal attributes rather than formal rules. The decentral-ized model is seen as having less punitive power because the principalis not personally involved in the control of the organization, formalrules guide behavior. Thus rule-breaking is defined in impersonalterms and probably not perceived as personal punishment.

Given the strong affective relationships that arise betweenteacher and student, any attempt by the teacher to enforce rules willprobably be viewed by the student as personal punishment. But theschool which uses formal rules probably reduces this feeling. Studentswho are in an organizational climate that uses formal rules for organi-zational control perceive political authorities as having less punitivepower, while those in schools where organizational control is informalsee all political authorities as having great punitive power, even theSupreme Court which epitomizes formal rule-making.

The racial proportion in the class explained best the studentperceptions of the punitive power of the Supreme Court, policeman, andgovernment. No organiZatiotal climate factor or control variablesignificantly explained the President's perceived punitive power. Thecorrelation coefficients and the levels of significance are reportedbelow:

President .10 at .745Policeman .47 at .047

3. Govelament .49 at .0374. Supreme Court .63 at .010

The greater the proportion of Black students in the class the lowerthe perception of political authority's -punitive power.

The student's perceptions of the role attributes of politicalauthorities resulted primarily from the student's race, with Blackstudents seeing political authorities as more benevolent but morefallible and punitively weaker than White students. This combination

57

of orientation's indicates that the Black students may be taking aparticipant stance toward the political system. Although the highbenevolence indicates that the students feel vulnerable as Easton andHess point out,27 they apparently do not feel helpless about it as thelow infallibility and punitive Power ratings indicate. The Whitestudents' low benevolence rating indicates they do not feel vulnerable,but they do rate political authority high on infallibility and puni-tive power. This would indicate the possibility of a subject stancebecause authority is evaluated as being non-threatening and powerful.

E. SET FOUR - POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE

The political knowledge questions measured the salience ofpolitics to the student and his information concerning political par-ties. Those students with a participant orientation would have ahigh-interest in politics and would see party politics as relevantand important. Those _with a subject orientation would have a lowinterest in politics and 'would not see party politics as important orrelevant.

As shown Ln Chapter Four, Factor II, Leadership Initiation, wasrelated to how much influence the teacher had upon the student'scitizenship training. In the Autonomous climate where the teacher wasable to make many decisions independently of the principal, thestudents reported their teacher as having much influence concerningcitizenship training. While in the Paternal climate where the princi-pal made all the decisions and the teachers obeyed, the students per-ceived their teachers as having little citizenship influence. Theteacher in Autonomous climate is more a participant in the schoolorganization while the teacher is more a subject in the Paternalclimate.

The subject and participant teacher models apparently are ob-served by the students who transfer them in terms of subject and parti-cipant political orientations. The students in the Paternal climateshowed a subject orientation by reporting that politics was not verysalient to them as compared to a higher salience by the more partici-pant oriented students in the Autonomous climate. The salience ofpolitics was measured by asking the students, "How much are youinterested in reading or talking about current events, government, orother things going on in our country ? " ?8 Factor II, LeadershipInitiation and Factor iv, Administrative Structure had a multiple

27

28

David Easton and Robert b. Hess pp, cit., p. 243.

Appendix C, Civic Education Questionnaire, question l9.

58

correlation coefficient of .64 explaining 41% of the variancesignificant at .019. The partial correlations and the levels ofsignificance are as follows:

1. Factor II, Leadership Initiation .5Z at .0322. Factor IV, Administrative Structure -.49 at .044

Factor -IV, Administrative Structure, also explained studentperceptions concerning the salience of politics. However the factorwas not related to student perceptions of the teacher's citizenshipinfluence or role attributes, so apparently the students were observ-ing the entire school as a model as they did in their perceptions ofthe Supreme Court's punitive power. In the school where the principalpersonally made all the administrative decisions in an informal waythe students perceived politics as very salient. Here the school ispossibly viewed as a participant in the school district where it aspersonified by the principal is able to make many decisions speciallyadapted to its own needs. In the school where administrative problemsare decided by formal rules the principal is not perceived as beingin charge but rather as merely carrying out orders. Thus the schoolcould be viewed as a subject in the school district, the students thentransfer this model to politics by seeing politics as not.very salient.

The factor climates that explain a high salience of politicsseem to be in contradiction, for how can the teachers be autonomous intheir leadership acts and yet have a principal who makes all theadministrative decisions? What happens here is that the teachers areautonomous concerning their subject matter decisions and are central-ized in terms of coordination of their teaching activities. No onetells them what to do in the library but the principal does tell themwhen they can use the library.

Factor IV, Administrative Structure, not only significantly ex-plained student perception's of the salience of politics but also.theimportance of political party membership for adults. The students wereasked, "How important do you Think it.is-for grown-ups to belong toeither the Republican or Democratic Party?"29 The students with 'parti-cipant political orientations would see party .membership as very im-portant and those with subjeCt orientations would see membership as notimportant at all. Again the students in the participant school wherethe principal had personal control the students-rated political partymembership as important. The students in the subject schools where theschool district rules prevailed, political party membership was seenas not very important.

The variance in student perceptions of the. importance of adultmembership in political parties was explained by the student's

29Ibid., question 78.

59

socio-economic status and the race of the questionnaire administratorsin addition to Factor IV, Administrative Structure. The multiple corre-lation coefficient was .81 with 66% of the variance explained signifi-cant at .001. The partial correlations and the levels of significanceare as follows:

1. Factor IV, Administrative Structure -.62 at .0112. Student Socio-Economic Status -.59 at .0163. Race of Interviewer -.51 at .044

As student socio-economic status rose, the more adult politicalparty membership was perceived as important. There was a similar butweaker relationship between student socio-economic status and studentperception of the differences between political parties,30 with uppersocio-economic status students perceiving a greater difference thanlower ones with a correlation of .21 significant at .462. Both ofthese confirm the Greenberg and Hess-Torney research that the higherthe student's socio-economic status the more likely he is going to havea participant political.orientation.31

In addition to organizational climate factors and student socio-economic status, three other variables also significantly explainedstudent perceptions of political parties. These were the proportion ofBlack students In .the class, the race of the questionnaire administra-tor, and the proportion of boys in the class. For student perceptionsof the differences between the-Democrats and the Republicans, the mul-tiple correlation coefficient was .75 explaining 56% of the variancewith a significance of .002. The partial correlation-coefficients andsignificance levels are as follows:

1. Proportion of Black Students in Class -.52.at .0342. Proportion of Boys in Class .60 at .011

The partial correlation coefficients and significance levels of studentsocio-economic status and race of interviewer in relation to studentperceptions of the importance of adult membership in a political partyare shown above.

If a class contained a predominance of Black female studentswhose questionnaire was administered by a Black man, these studentsperceived more difference between the Democrats and Republicans andfelt that political party membership was important for adults. TheWhite male interviewed by a White man saw little differences betweenthe political parties and felt that adult political party membership

Ibid., question 43.

31Edward S. Greenberg, op. cit., pp. 128, 156, 22

D. Hess and Judith V. Torney, op. cit., pp. 224-225.

60

and Robert

was not important. Thus it would seem that Black female students heldthe most participant orientations-toward political parties and thatWhite males had the most subject orientation. The salience ofpolitics to the students could be explained by factors of the school'sorganizational climate but orientations toward political parties wasexplained in small part by the schools' over-all administrative struc-ture and in large part by the student's position in the social struc-ture.

SET FIVE - POLITICAL BEHAVIORS

The political behavior of the students was measured by theindices developed by Hess and Torney, the Index of Partici ation inPolitical Discussion and the Index. of Political Activity.3 Eachindex was composed of three questions from the Civic Education Ques-tionnaire that could be answered "Yes" or "No." The questions compos-ing-the Index of Participation in PolitiCal Discussion are as follows:

1. I have talked with my mother or father about our country'sproblems.

2. I. have talked with my mother or father about a candidate.. I have talked with my friends about a candidate.33

The questions composing the Index of Political Activity are as follows:

1. I have read about a candidate in newspapers or magazines.2. I have worn a button for a candidate.3. I have helped a candidate by doing things for him - such as

handing out buttons and papers with his name on them.34

The greater the number of "Yes" responses on either indek the studentwas considered to engage in more political discussion and activity.The student with a participant political orientation would-engage inmore political discussion and activity than the student with a subjectorientation.

For each school I computed a mean for each school from theindividual student political discussion and activity scores. Schooldifferences in political discussion could not be explained by any of

2_Robert D. Hess and Judith V. Torney, op. cit., Appendix

33Appendix C, Civic Education Questionnaire, questions 24, 27and 25.

34- i ques =Ions 26, 22, and 23.

61

the organizational climate factors or the control variables, althoughthere is a weak relationship, a correlation of .38 significant at .121,between the class racial proportion and political discussion. As theproportion of Black students increases the amount of political discus-sion increases, and as the proportion of. White students increases,political discussion decreases. This same relationship held for politi-cal activity being statistically significant, a correlation of .57significant at .014. Also none of the organizational climate factorswere significantly related to school differences in student politicalactivity.

Thus 1. would conclude that the organizational climate of theschools has no effect upon the political behavior of the students.Rather it is the racial composition of the school in low socio-economicstatus elementary schools that is related to student political behavior,with racial segregation having different effects for different races.All-Black schools showing the greatest amount of participant politicalbehavior and all-White schools showing the greatest amount of subjectpolitical behavior.

62

CHAPTER SIX

CONCLUSION

This exploratory study has revealed that the elementary schoolorganizational climate caninfluence..student political-orientations andbehavior by two processes. First, the teacher-reflecting the organiza-

climate-of the elementary -school presents a role model. that thestudent imitates and then transfers this model to political objects.Second,' the elementary school organization can present a- role modelthat the student transfers to political objects. My factor analysisof the Organizational Climate Description Questionnaire revealed fourfactors of the elementary school organiiational climate, -Factor II,-Leadership Initiation, and Factor III, Source of Social Cohesion,were related to student political orientations andbehaVior via. theteacher as a Tole model. Factor I, Sense Of-Organizational Attachment,and Factor IV, Administrative Structure,- were related via the schoolorganization as a model. Although:the- four organizational- climate

.

factors could. predict the few school differences discussed below, Ifound-that school racial proportions- -could"explain many more schooldifferences in student-p-oliticalrientationsand behavior. My re-:.Search indicates. thatthe-elementary'school.organizational.climate-hasless -relationship to student political behavior and orientations thanthe racial coMposition of the school.-

Two _rganizationalclimate-factors, Factor II, Leadership.-initiation, and-Factor III, Source of Social Cohesion,- Were relatedstudentperceptiens.of'the role modelofteachers. But only in -the..FaCtorlI climate waa,there-a:transfer-Ofthe teacher role to thepolitical.systeM, Factor III could :only:explain ':different student per--ceptions -ofteachers' roles.... Thus it.would.seem-that when aschool-organizational .climatechanges in relation:to.Factor II, one can expectsome changes. in student political orientations,_bntnot-liihen theorganizational climate changes-regarding Factor III.

Factor_II, Leadership .Initiation, was related to student percep-tiens of the teachers'influeneeL4Pon them.regarding- the teaching ofcitizenship...and the- teacher role attribute of infallibility. When aschool's organizational climate was inthat-ehe teacherswere allowed much latitude in school decision-making,'.the students_jperceived their teacher as teaching them much about .being a geodcitizen and viewed the teacher as making few mistakes. Studentsapparently 'transferred this participant view of the teacher in theschool-organization -to thepolitical system by -reporting a higherinterest.in. polities. Howeverthe students did not transfer their...feelings-of teacher infallibility-to either. political authorities or

63

institutions. When the school's organizational climate was Paternalin that the principal makes all the decisions, the teacher role wouldbe more of a subject In the school organization. The student's caughtthis by perceiving the teacher as not being very influential inteaching them about citizenship and being fallible. This apparentlytransferred to the political system in that the students reported alower interest in politics.

Factor III, Source of Social Cohesion, was only related tostudent perceptions of the teacher role attributes of benevolence andinfallibility but neither of these were transferred to politicalauthorities or institutions. When the teacher felt that he was inte-grated into the school organization in that his need to belong to asocial group was satisfied by being a good teacher, the studentsperceived their teacher as benevolentand infallible. When theteacher only came to school to socialize with his 'fellow teachers andthat teaching was not the reason he came to school, the students per-ceived their teacher as 1,?ss benevolent and more fallible. Since thisorganizational factor had no relationship to student political orienta-tions and behavior, I would speculate that it might be related toStudent academic achievement with the benevolent and infallible teacherhaving students who achieve more. Finally, I noted that Black studentswere more sensitive to the two organizational climate factors in thatthey rated the teacher as having more citizenship influence, benevolence,and infallibility than White students in the same organizational climatefactor.

Factor I, Sense of Organizational Attachment, and Factor IV,Administrative Structure were related to student perceptions of therole model of their schools; Both factors were-related to studentpolitical orientations and behaviors. Regarding Factor I, in a schoolwhere the teachers felt a Sense of attachment to the school, thisfeeling was apparently picked up by thestudents who then repOrted thatthey felt attached to the American political system. When the teachersreported a low feeling school attachment, the Students'rep rted thesame for the American political system.

In the Factor IV, Administrative Structure, school where theadministrative functions are centralized in the person of the principal,the teachers are more threatened and vulnerable to the principal'sauthority. Thus the punitive power of the school organization is greatand the students show some transference of this to political authoritiesand institutions. The attributing of benevolence by the students tothese authorities and institutions also indicates a feeling of vulner-ability. However the impact of this realization of the great punitivepower of authority figures and institutions is to increase studentinterest in politics especially party politics. The school where theadministrative structure is decentralized and formal, possibly rigid,the teachers are not threatened nor vulnerable to the principal's author-ity. This apparently is transierred to political authorities and

64

institutions. Since no punitive power. is perceived the .interest inpolitics and the importance of party politics also declines..

Although 1 was able to discover some relationship at theelementary school level between the four organizational climate fac-tors and student political orientations and behavior that was inde-pendent of the control variables, many of the relationships were weakand only explained a few student orientations and behavior. Thus ifone is interested in changing the organizational climate of the lowsocio-economic status elementary scho61, one could expect few changesupon the entire student body. However it is possible that certainkinds of students might be more affected by organizational climatefactors than others and this should be the focus of future researchregarding the influence of school organizational climate factors uponstudent political orientations and behavior.

The most powerful predictor of-the school differences in studentpolitical orientations and behavior was the racial composition of theschool, holding all other variables constant: race of interviewer,socio-economic status and sex of student, sex of the teacher, and thefour organizational climate factors. As can be seen from Table 2-1practically all the schools were racially segregated, either all-Whiteor all-Black. The political effects of racial segregation was differ-ent for each race. The all-Black schools reported political orienta-tions that were non-supportive of the political system and politicalbehavior that was activist, while the all-White schools were supportivein orientations and non-activist in political behavior.

As the proportion of Black students increased in the low socio-economic status elementary schools the feelings of attachment to theAmerican political communitydecreased, the laws were perceived as in-effective, the policeman was perceived as threatening, authority figuresand institutions were seen as fallible and lacking in punitive power.However greater differences were perceived between the Democrats andRepublicans and the students in the all-Black schools believed thatpolitical party membership was important. This was indicated in theirpolitical behavior where they engaged in more political discussion andactivity than the students in all-White low socio-economic statuselementary schools.

Those students in all-White elementary schools had higher attach-ment to the :American political Community, saw laws as effective, didnot perceive the policeman as threatening, and authority figures wereperceived as infallible and possessing great punitive power. .As theelementary school racial composition became more White, the studentscould not discern differences between the Democrats and Republicansand political party membership was not seen as important. Politicaldiscussion and activity was lower than that in all-Black schools.

What all this indicates, is that the apparent effect of racial

65

segregation upon Black students as a group is to increase theirpoliticization and to decrease it for the White students as a group.The over-all effect of segregation appears to be related on activistor participant political orientation for the Black student body and anon-activist or subject political orientation of the White studentbody of similar low socio-economic status. It would appear that thepolitical effect of racial integration in terms of over-all studentbody political orientations and behavior is to decrease participantpolitical orientations. As a future research problem I would suggestan examination of the individual effects of racial integration ofelementary schools upon the individual student political orientationsand behavior. It may well be that the political effect of racialintegration is to deactivate low socio-economic status Black politicalbehavior and to activate low socio-economic status White politicalbehavior.

66

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Almond Gabriel A. and Verba, Sidney.Princeton U P., 1963.

Andrews, John H.presentedFebruary,

Argyris, Chris.New York:

ivic Culture, Princeton:

M. "SoMe Validity Studies df heOCDQ." Paperat the American Educational Research Association,1965, Chicago. Mimeographed.

IR2ZratinWiley, 1964 .

the Individual and the 0 anization.

Argyris, Chris. InterventionTan. Reading, Mass.:Addison-Wesley, 1970.

Argyris, Chris.Climate:Quarterly

"Some Problems in Conceptualizing OrganizationalA Case Study of a Bank." Administrative Science2 (1958): 501-520.

Bandura, Albert. "BehaviorResearch in Behaviorand Leonard Ullman.

Modification Through Modeling Procedures.Modification, edited by Leonard KrasnerNew York: Holt-Rinehart & Winston, 1965.

Brink, William and Harris, Lou. The Ne ro Revolution-in America.New York: Simon & Schuster, 1964

Broverman, Donald M. "Effects of Score Transformations in Q and RFactor Analysis Techniques. PsychologicalReview. 68 (1961)

Broverman, Donald M. "Normative and Ipsetive Measurement in P chol-ogy. Psychological Review. 69 (1962): 295-305.

Brown, Alan F. and House, John H. "The Organizational Component inEducation." Review of Educational earch (1967): 399-413.

Clark, Kenneth B. Dark Ghetto New York: Harper & Row, 1965.

Coleman, James S.; Campbell, Ernest Q.; Hobson, Carol J. McPartland,James; Mood, Alekander M.4 Weinfeld, FredericM.; and York,Robert L. Eueqona10-_prtunit--. Washington,D.C.: HEW Office of Education, 1966.

Cornell, Francis G. "Socially Perceptive AdMinistration." he_PhiDelta Kappan 36 (1955): 219-223

Dawson, Richard B., and Prewitt, Kenneth. Politid-1 SocializationBoston: Little Brown, 1969.-

67

Easton, David, and Hess, Robert D. "The Child's Political World."Midwest Journal of Political Science, 6 (1962): 229-246.

Greenberg, Edward S. "Political Socialization to Support of theSystem: A Comparison of Black and White Children." Ph.D.dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1969.

Green ein, Fred I. Children and Politics. New.Haven: Yale, 1965.

Greer, Germaine. The Female-Eunuch. Nev York: McGraw7Hill, 1971..

Halpin, Andrew W. Theory and Research in Administration. N.YMacmillan, 1966.

Halpin, Andrew W., and Crofts, Donald B. Ihsga/TALIonal Climate ofSchools. Washington, D. C.: HEW Office of Education, .CRP -5July, 1962.

Herndon, James. The Way It -Speed To Be. New York: Simon & Schuster-1969.

Herriott, Robert,E,, and St. John, Nancy Hoyt. Social Class and theUrban SchoolThe Impact of Pu il Back :round on Teachers andPrincipals. N. Y.: Wiley, 1966.

Herzberg, Frederick. Work and the Nature of Man. Cleveland: World,1966.

Hess Robert D., and TOrney, Judith V. The Development of _Basic ,-Attitudes and:Values Toward Government and Citizenshi Burinthe Elementar_ School Year Part I. Washington, D .C.: HEW,Offi6e of Edutation,HCRP1078, 1965.

Hess, Robert D., arid. TorniY, Judith. V. The Develaluent of PoliticalAttitudes inchildren, ChiCago: Aldine, 1967.

Hirsch, Herbert. Poverty and Politicization. New York: Free Press,1971.

Holt, John. iow Children Fail. New York: Delta, 1964.

Holt, John. New York:- Pitman, 1Y67.

Katz, Irwin; Robinson, J.M.; Epps, E.G.; and Waly, Patricia. "TheEffects of Race of Experimenter and Test Versus Neutral Instr c-tions on Expressions of Hostility." Journal of Social Issues20 (1964): 54-59.

Kohl, Herbert. 6 'Children. . New York: New American Library, 1967.

68

Kozol, Jonathan. Death At An Early Age. New York: Bantam, 1967.

Lavin David E. The Prediction of Academi- Performance. New York:Wiley, 1965.

Likert, Rensis.1967.

Human Organization. New York: McGraw -Hill,

Litt Edgar. "Civic Education, Community Norms, and Political Indoc-trination." -erican Sociological Review 28 (1963): 69-75.

Perrow, Charles. Com lex Organizations. Glenview, Illinois: Scott,Foresman, 1972.

Rafter, Mary E., and Ruble, William L. "Stepwise Deletion of Variablesfrom a Least Squares Equation," East Lansing: Michigan StateUniversity, Agricultural Experiment Station, STAT Series Descrip-tion No. 8 LSDEL, 1969.

Rosenthal, Robert, and Jacobson, Lenore. Pygmalion in the Classroom.New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1968.

Rummell, R. Applied Factor al1sis. Evanston, Illinois:Northwester U.P., 1970.

Silberman, Charles E. Crisis in Black and White. New York: Random,1964.

Tagiuri, Renato, and Litwin, George H., eds. 0 anizational Climate--E -orations.- of a Conceit. Cambridge: Harvard 1968.

APPENDIX A

ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE DESCRIPTION QUESTIONNAIRE

Dear Full-Time Faculty Member at

I weld appreciate your cooperation in completing the enclosed

it should take you about 15 minutes to complete. DO NOT WRITE

THE QUESTIONNAIRE. When you have completed the questionnaire,

half, staple it closed, and return it to the school secretary..

questionnaire,

YOUR NAME ON

fold it

The items in this questionnaire describe typical behaviors'or conditionsthat occur within an elementary school organization. Please indicate towhat extent each of these descriptions characterizes 2,2y3- school. Pleasedo not evaluate the items in terms of "good" or "bad" behavior, but readeach item carefully and respond in terns of how well the statement describesyour sch6ol.

Printed below is an example of a typical item found in the questionnaire:

1. Teachers_ call each other by their first names.1. Rarely occurs.2. Sometimes occurs.3. Often occurs.4. Very frequently occurs.

In this example the respondent circled (pencil or pen) alternative 3 on thequestionnaire to show that the interpersonal relationship described by thisitem "often occurs" at the school. Of course, any of the other alternativescould be selected, depending, upon how often the behavior described by theitem does, indeed, occur in your school.

The purpose of this questionnaire is to secure a description of the differentways in which teachers behave and of the various conditions under which theymust work. After you have completed the questionnaire, I will examine thebehaviors or conditions that have been described as typical by the majorityof the teachers in your school. I will construct from this description aportrait of the Organizational Climate of your school which shall be madeavailable to the entire faculty of the school.

PLEASE BE SURE THAT YOU MARK EVERY ITEM.

PLEASE ANSWER THIS QUESTIONNAIRE INDEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER TEACHERS.

gincerely yours,

Alfred S. ArkleyPolitical Science DepartmentMichigan State University

70

1-2. School Number

Teachers' closest friends are other faculty members at this school.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occur

The mannerisms of teachers at this school are annoying.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4.- Very frequently occurs

Teachers spend time after school with students who have individual problems.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

Instructions for the operation of teaching aids are available.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

Teachers invite other faculty members to visit them at home.1. 'Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs

Often occursF. Very frequently occurs

There isa minority group of teachers who always oppose the majority.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

9. Extra books are available1. Rarely occurs

.2. Sometimes, occurs3. :Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

classroom use.

71

10. Sufficient time is.given to prepare °administrative reports.1. Rarely occurs2. .Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

11. Teachers know the family background of other faculty members.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

12. Teachers exert group pressure on non-confo ng faculty members.1. Rarely occurs2. 3o times occurs3. Often occurs4. Very freqUently occurs

13. In faculty meetings, there is the feeling cf "let's get things done."1. Rarely occurs2. Some times occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

14. Administrative paper work is burdensome at this school.1. Rarely occurs2. :Sometimesoccurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

15. Teachers talk about their per Onal life to other faculty members.jtarely occurs

2, Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

16. Teachersseek special favors from the principal.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

17. School supplies are readily available for use in cies1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

72

ark

18. Student progress reports require too much work.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. 'Very frequently occurs

19. Teachers have fun socializing together during school time.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Tery frequently o ccurs

20. Teachers' interrupt other faculty members who a e talking in sta f meetin1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimesodcurs

Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

21. Most of the teachers here accept the faults of their colleagues.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

2 2. Teachers have, too many committee requirements.1. Rarely Occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

23. There is considerable laughter when teachers gather informally.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

24. Teachers ask nonsensical questions in faculty meetings.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

25. Custodial services is available when needed.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

73

26. Routine duties interfere with the job cf teaching.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

27. Teachers prepare administrative reports by themselves.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

28 Teachers ramble when they talk in faculty meetings1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

29. Teachers at this school show much school spirit.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs

Often occurs

Very frequently occurs,

30. The principal goes out of his way to help teachers.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently -occurs

31. The principal helps teachers solve personal problems.1. Rarely occurs2. SometimeS Occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

Teachers At this school stay by themselves.1. Rarely occurs-2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. -Very-.frequently Occurs

The teachers accomplish their work with great vim, vigor, -d pleasure.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

34. The principal sets an example by working hard himself._1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs

. Often occursVery frequently occurs

35. The principal does personal favors for teachers.I. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs

Often occursVery frequently occurs

36. Teache s eat lunch by themselves in their own classrooms.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

37. -The_. morale of the teachers is high.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very freqUently occurs

38. The principal uses constructive criticism.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

39. The principal stays after school to help teachers finish their work.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

40. Teachers secialize together in small _elect groups.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

41. The principal makes all class- scheduling decisions,1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

75

42. Teachers are contacted by the principal-each d1. Rarely occurs...2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

43. The principal is well prepared when he speaks at school functions.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs

Often .occurVery frequently occurs

44. The principal helps staff members settle minor differences.1. Rarely-occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. -Often occurs4. Very- frequently occurs

y.

45. The principal schedules the work for teachers.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

46. Teachers-leaVe the grounds during the school day.1. Rarely occurs2.- Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

47. Teachers help select which courses will be taught.-I.. Rarely occurs2. Sometimesoccurs

Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

48. The principal, corrects teachers' mistakes.J__. Rarely occurs:2.: Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. -.Very frequently occurs

49. e principal talks a great deal.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

76

50. The principal explains his reasons for criticism to teachers.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

51. The principal is in support of better salaries for teachers.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

52. Extra duty for teachers is posted conspicuously.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often' occurs4. Very frequently occurs

53. The rules set by the principal are never questioned.I. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

54. The principal looks out for the personal welfare of teachers.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

55. School secretarial services is available for teachers' use.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

56. The principal runs the faculty meeting like a business meeting.1. Rarely occurs=2.. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

57. The principal is in the building before teachers arrive.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very.frequently occurs

77

58. Teachers work together preparing administrative reports.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

59. Faculty meetings are organized according to a tight agenda.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

60. Faculty meetings are mainly principal-report meetings.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

61. The principal tells teachers of new ideas he has run across.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

62. Teachers talk about leaving the school system.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes Occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

63. The principal checks the subject-matter ability of teachers.1. Rarely occurs2 Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occ.rs

64. The principal is easy to understand.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

65. Teachers are informed of the results of supe_-isor's visit.1. Rarely occurs2. Sometimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

66. The principal insures that teachers work to their full capacity.1. Rarely occurs2. Sotetimes occurs3. Often occurs4. Very frequently occurs

78

APPENDIX B

OCDQ QUESTIONS THAT COMPOSE THE EIGHT SUBTESTSSubtests Relating to the Teachers' Behavior

I. DISENGAGEMENT

4. The mannerisms of teachers at this school are annoying.8. There is a minority group of teachers who always oppose the

majority.12. Teachers exert group pressure on non-conforming faculty members.16: Teachers seek special favors from the principal.20. Teachers interrupt other faculty members who are talking in

staff meetings.24. Teachers ask nonsensical questions in faculty meetings.28. Teachers ramble when they talk in faculty meetings.32. Teachers at this school stay by themselves.40. Teachers socialize together in small select groups.62. Teachers talk about leaving the school system.

II. HINDRANCE

*6. Instructions for the operation of teaching aids are available.*10. Sufficient time is given to prepare administrative reports.14.- Administrative paper work is burdensome -at this school.18. Student. progress reports require too much work.22. Teachers have too many committee requirements.26. Routine duties interfere with the job of teaching.

ESPRIT

5. Teachers spend time after school with students who have indi-vidual problems.

9. Extra books are available for classroom use.13. In faculty meetings, there is the feeling of "let's get things

done."17 School supplies are readily available for use in classwork.21. Most of the teachers here accept the faults of their colleagues.23. There is considerable laughter when teachers gather informally.25. Custodial services is available when needed.29. Teachers at this school show much school spirit.33. The teachers accomplish their work with great vii, vigor and

pleasure.37. The morale of the teachers is high.

IV. INTIMACY

3. Teachers' closest friends are other faculty members at thisschool.

7. Teachers invite other faculty members to visit them at home.11. Teachers know the family background of other faculty members.15. Teachers talk about their personal life to other faculty

members.19. Teachers have fun socializing together during school time.

*27. Teachers prepare administrative reports by themselves.58. Teachers work together preparing administrative reports.

*Scored negatively.

79

Subtests Relating to the Principal's Behavior

ALOOFNESS

36. Teachers eat lunch by themselves in their own classrooms.42. Teachers are contacted by the principal each day.46. Teachers leave the grounds during the school day.53. The rules set by the principal are never questioned.55. School secretarial service is available for teachers' use.56. The principal runs the faculty meeting like a business meeting.59. Faculty meetings are organized according to a tight agenda.60. Faculty meeetings are mainly principal-report meetings.

*65. Teachers are informed of the results of a supervisor's visit.VI. PRODUCTION EMPHASIS

41. The principal makes all class scheduling decisions.45. The principal schedules the work for the teachers.48. The principal corrects teachers' mistakes.49. The principal talks a great deal.52. Extra duty for teachers is posted conspicuously.63. The principal checks thersubject matter ability of teachers.66. The principal insures that teachers work to their full capacity.

VII. THRUST

30.

34.

38.

43.

50.

54.

57.

61.

64.

The principalThe principalThe principalThe principalfunctions.TheprincipalThe principalThe principalThe principalThe principal

VIII. CONSIDERATION

goes out of his way to help teachers.sets an example by working hard himself.uses constructive criticism.is well prepared when he speaks at school

explains his reasons for criticismlooks out for the personal welfareis in the building before teacherstells teachers of new ideas he hasis easy to understand.

to teachers.of teachers.arrive.run across.

31. The principal helps teachers solve personal problems.35. The principal does personal favors for teachers. .

.

39. The principal stays after schoel to help. teachers finish-their work..

44. The principal helps staff members settle minor differences.47. Teachers help select which courses will be taught.51. The principal is in support of better salaries .for teachers.

Scored negatively.

80.

APPENDIX C

CIVIC EDUCATION QUESTIONNAIRE

Michigan State University

I and another person from Michigan State University are visiting all the 5th

grade classes in this school and in other schools in Michigan to ask boys and

girls like yourselves to answer the questions on the questionnaire I have

given you.

We would like to know what boys and girls think about the things mentioned in

the questionnaire. You should understand that this is a questionnaire. It

not a test. You cannot pass or fail. We are only interested in getting your

opinion. Because we think when we ask people for- their opinions it is impor-

tant to keep what they say private, your-name will not be on the questionnaire.

DO NOT WRITE YOUR NAM ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE.

For each question you will circle on the questionnaire the answer you think

comes closest to your opinion. Remember there are no right or wrong answers,

we only want tO know what you think -- what your opinion is.

I will read each question aloud while you read it silently. After each ques-

tion is read, you should choose your answer and circle the number in front of

the answer.

Now turn the page and we will start together with question number

1-2.Class Code.

You are a:1. Boy2. Girl

4! How old are you?1. 8 years old or younger2. 9 years old3. 10 years old4. 11 years old5. 12 years old or older

5. America is the best country in the world.1. YES!! YES!!2. yes3. no opinion4. no5. NJ!! NO!!

6. What- makes you the most proud to be an American?1. Ameri7ans are the most generous people in the world.2. America has beautiful parks and highways.3. Americans can vote for their own leaders.

Americans have freedom.5. Our President.6. Our Black Leaders.

Which one of these does the most to keep peace in the world?1. United Nations.,2, United States.

I don't know.

8. Think of the President as he really is...1. Would always want to help me if I needed it.2. Would almost always want to help me if .I needed it.3. Would usually want to help me if I needed it.4. Would sometimes want to help me if I needed it.5. Would seldom want to help me if I needed it.6. Would not usually want to help me if I needed it.

Think of the President as he really is...1. Almost never makes mistakes.2. Rarely makes mistakes.3. Sometimes. makes mistakes.4. Often makes mistakes..5. Usually makes mistakes.6. Almost always makes mistakes.

10. Think of the President as he really is...1. Can punish anyone.

.

2. Can punish almost anyone.3. Can punish many people.4. Can punish some people.5. Can punish a few people.6. Can punish no one.

11. Most laws were made a long time ago.1. YES!! YES!!2. yes3. no opinion4. no5. NO!! NO!!

12. I don't think people in the government care much what: people like myfamily think.1. YES!! YES!!2. yes3. no opinion4. no5. NO!! NO!!

13. Voting is the only Way that people like my parents can have any sayabout how the government runs things.1. YES!! .YES!!2. yes3. no opinion4. no5. NO!! NO!!

14. If the President came to your town to give a prize to the grown-up whowas the best citizen, which of the following grown-ups would he choose?(Choose one)1. Someone who works hard.2. Someone who everybody likes.3. Someone who votes and gets others to vote.4. Someone who helps others.5. Someone who is interested in the way our country is run.6. Someone who obeys the law.7. Someone who goes to church or synagogue.8. I don't know what citizen means.

15. Think of Your Mother as she really is...1. Would always want to help me if I needed it.2. Would almost always want to help me if I needed it.3. Would usually want to help me if I needed it.4. Would sometimes want to help me if I needed it.5. Would seldom want to help me if I needed it.6. Would not usually want to help me if I needed it.

16. Think of Your Mother as she really1. Almost never makes mistakes.2. Rarely makes mistakes.3. Sometimes makes mistakes.4. Often makes mistakes.5. Usually makes mistakes.6. Almost always makes mistakes.

17. Think of Your Mother as she really is...1. Can2. Can3. Can4. Cau5. Can6. Can

punishpunishpunishpunishpunishpunish

anyone.

almost anyone.many people.some people.a few people.no one.

I think that what goes on in the ...government is all for the best.1. YES!! YES!!2. yesJ. no opinion4. no

NO!! NOU

How much are you interested in reading or talking about current eventsgovernment, or other things going on in our country? (choose one)1. Very much2. Some

Only a little

84

20. Disobey means to do something someone tells you not to do. Which of theseis the9et20/aat? (Choose one)I. To disobey your mother.2. To disobey your teacher.3. To disobey your father.4. To disobey the 221.iceman.

21. Which do you think is the most true? (Choose one)1. People who break laws always get caught.2. People who break laws ustAtleit.3. People who break laws usually get away.4. People who break laws always get

In reading the next few things, you should know that every four year. peoplerun for offiCe in our government,- this is called an election; and the peoplerunning in it are called candidates. Things about government, politics, andcandidates that you have done:

22. I have worn a button for a candidate.1. Yes2. No

23. I have helped a.candidate by doing things for him -- such as handing outbuttons and papers with his name on them.1. Yes2. No

24. I have talked with my mother or father about our country's problems.1. Yes2. No

25. I have talked with my friends about a candidate.1. Yes2. No

26. I have read about a candidate in newspapers or magazines.1. Yes2. No

27. I have talked with my mother or father about a candidate.1. Yss2. No

85

28. Choose the sentence which comes closest to telling what your Motheror Guardian's job is.1. She stays home most of the time and has no job.2. She works in a factory, laundry, restaurant, hotel, or house as a maid

or waitress or some other job where she works with her hands.She works as a saleslady, clerk, or secretary.She works in an office or store for somebody else.She owns a small store.

She wears a uniform or nice clothes to work.4. She is a teacher, social worker, lawyer, nurse or some job like that.

She has a college training for her job.5. She is looking for a job.6. I don't know what my Mother or Guardian does.

29. Choose the sentence which comes closest to telling what your Father orGuardian's job is. (If your Father or Guardian doesn't live at homeanymore, circle answer 9)1. He works in a factory or mill, or as a truck driver, janitor, or some

other job where he works with his hands.He works with his hands in a job that takes a long time to learn likea carpenter, an electrician, a plumber, a TV repairman, a machinist, etc.He works in an office or store for somebody else.He works as a salesman, clerk, or bookkeeper.He owns a service station, laundry, or small store.He is a fireman, soldier, policeman, or works for the government.He usually wears a uniform or a white shirt and tie to work.He works in an office as a manager or executive.He is a doctor, lawyer, teacher, engineer or some job like that.He has a college training for his job.

6. He owns a large business, like a factory or a big store.7. He is looking for a job.8. I don't know what my Father or Guardian does.9. My Father or Guardian doesn't live at home anymore.

30. What happens in the government will happen no matter what the people do.It is like the weather, there is nothing people can do about it.1. YES!! YES!!2. yes3. no opinion4. no5. NO!! NO!!

31. There are some big powerful men in the government who are running thewhole thing and they do not care about us ordinary people.1. YES!! yEs!!2. yes3. no opinion4. no5. NO!! NO!!

86

32. Think of the L42Ieme Court s it really is...1. Would always want to help me if I needed it.2. Would almost always want to help me if I needed it3. Would usually want to help me if I needed it.4. Would sometimes want to help me if I needed it.5. Would seldom want to help me if I needed it.6. Would not usually want to help me if I needed it.

33. Think of the Supreme Court as it really is.1. Almost never makes mistakes.2. Rarely makes mistakes.3. Sometimes makes mistakes.4. Often makes mistakes.5. :Usually makes mistakes.6. Almost always makes mistakes.

34. Think of the Su pr me Court as it really is..1. Can punish anyone.2. Can punish almost anyone.3. Can punish many people.4. Can punish some people.5. Can punish a few people.6. Can punish no one.

Below are a list of people and things. For each person or thing, choose thesentence that shows how much they teach you about being a good citizen.

35. How much does your mother teach you about being a good citizen?1. She teaches me an awful lot.2. She teaches me a lot.3. She teaches me some.-4. She teaches me a little.5. She doesn't teach me at all.

36. How much does you,. father teach you about being a good citizen?1. He teaches me an awful lot.2. He teaches me a lot.3. He teaches me some.4. He teaches me a little.5. He doesn't teach me at all.

How much do your friends teach You about being a good citizen?1.. teach me an awful2. They teach me a lot.3. They -teao.h me some.4. They teach me a little.

They don't teach me at all.

38. How much does your minister, priest, or rabbi teach you about being agood citizen?1. He teaches me an awful lot.

He teaches me a lot.. He teaches me some.

4. He teaches me a'little.5. He doesn't teach me at all.

39. How much does television teach you about being a good citizen?1. It teaches me an awful lot.2. It.teaches'me a lot.3. It teach me some.

It teaches me a little.It doesn't teach me at all.

40. How much do books, magazines, and newspapers teach you about being a:good citizen?.1. They teach me an awful lot.2. They teach me a lot.3. They teach me some.4. They teach me a little.5. They don't teach me at all.

88

41. How much does your teacher teach you about being a good citizen?1. She teaches me an awful lot.2. She teaches me a ,lot.3 She teaches me some.4. She teaches me a little.5. She doesn't teach me stall.

42. How much difference is there between the Democrats and the Republicans?(Choose one)1. A very big difference.2. A big difference.3. Some difference.4. A very small difference.5. No difference.6. 1 don't know.

43. If the Democrats and Republicans disagreed on important things: (Choosethe sentence that is closest to wl1at you think would happen.)1. It would be very bad for the country.2. It would be bad for the country.3. It wchild not matter.4. It would be good for the country.5. It would be very good for the country.6. I don't know.

44. Think of Your Teacher as she really is1. Would always want to help me if I needed it.2. Would almost always want to help me if I needed it3. Would usually want to help me if I needed it.4. Would sometimes want to help me if I needed it.5. Would seldom want to help me if I needed it.6. Would not usually want to help me if I needed it.

45. Think of Your Teacher as she really is...1. Almost never makes mistakes.2. Rarely makes mistakes.3. Sometimes makes mistakes.4. Often makes mistakes.5. Usually makes mistakes.6. Almost always makeS mist

46. Think of Your Teacher1. Can punish anyone.

Can punish almost anyone.Can punish many people.

k. Can punish some people.5. Can punish a few people.6. Can pUnish no one.

she really is...

89

41. How much does our teacher teach you about being a good citi1. He teaches me an awful lot.2. He teaches me a lot.3. He teaches me some.4. He teaches me a little.5. He doesn't teach me at all.

en?

42. How much difference is there between the Democrats and the Republicans?(Choose one)1. A very big difference.2. A big difference.3. Some difference.4. A very small difference.5. No difference.6. I don't know.

43 If the Democrats and Republicans disagreed on important things:(Choose the sentence that is closest to what. you think would happen.)1. It would be very bad for the country.2. It would be bad for the country.3. It would not matter.

'4. It would be good for the country.5. It would be very good far the country.6, I don't know.

44. Think.of your Teacher as he really is...1. Would always want to help me if I needed it.2. Would almost always want to help me if I needed it.3. Would usually want to help me if I needed4. Would sometimes want to help me if I needed it.5. Would seldom want to help me if I-needed it.6. Would not-usually want to help me if I needed it.

45. Think of Your Teacher as he really is...1. Almost never makes mistakes.2. Rarely makes mistakes.3. Sometimes makes mistakes.4. Often makes mistakes.5. Usually makes mistakeS.6. Almost always makes mistakes.

46. Think of Your Teacher as he really is1. Can punish anyone.2. Can punish almost anyone.3. Can punish many people.4. Can punish some people.5. Can punish a few people.6. Can punish no one.

90

47. If you could vote, where would be the best place to look for help inmaking up your mind who to vote for? (Choose one)1. A friend my own age.2. My father.

My mother.My mother and father.My teacher.

My minister, priest, or rabbi.Televi;;ion and redic.Magazines mAd newspapers.

9. I would 4lakc. up my own mind.10. I don't know.

48. If the President came to your school to give a prize to the pupil who wasthe best citizen and the teacher offered him one pupil, which of the follow-ing pupils would the teacher pick? (Choose one)1. A pupil who helps others.2. A pupil who does what he or she is told.3. A pupil who gets good grades.4. A pupil who is interested in the way our country run.5. A pupil who everybody likes.6. A pupil who works hard.7. A pupil who goes to church or synagogue.

I don't know what citizen means.

49. All laws are fair.1. YES!! YES!!2. yes3. no opinion4. no5. NO!! NO!!

50. Do you belong to a school club, organization, or committee (such asstudent council, musical organization, or service committee)?1. Yas2. No

.51. In this school year I belong to some team (which meets after school hours)which plays baseball, basketball, volleyball, or some other sport.1. Yes2. No

52. Think of the Policeman as he really is...1. Would always want to help me if I needed it.2. Would almost always want to'help me if I needed3. Would usually want to help me if I needed it.4. Would sometimes want to help me if I needed5. Would seldom want to help me if I needed it.6. Would not usually want to help me if I needed it:.

53. Think of the Policeman as he really is...1. Almost never makes mistakes.2. Rarely makes mistakes. .

3. Sometimes Makes mistakes.4. Often makes mistakes.5. EJually makes mistakes.6. Almost always makes mistakes.

54. Think of the Policeman as he.really is...1. Can punish anyone.2. Can punish almost anyone.3. Can punish many. people.4. Can punish some people.5. Can punish a few people.6. Can punish no one,

What is a dethocracy? n each of the following questions, choose one

55. Is a democrl.c.17 where the people rule?

-1. Yes2. No3. I don't know.

56. Is a democracy where no one is very rich or very poor?1. Yes2. No3. I don't know.

57. Is a democracy where all grown-ups can vote?1. Yes2. No

. I don know.

58. Is a democracy where everyone has an equal chance to get ahead?1. Yes2. No

I don't know.

5 . Is a democracy where you can say anything against the government withoutgetting into trouble?1. Yes2. No

I don't know.

60. Is a democracywhere if most of the people agree, the rest should go along?1. Yes2. No3. I don't k now .

61. Think of the Government as it.really is...1. WOuld always want tO help me if I needed it.2. Would almost always want to help me if I needed3. Would usually want to help me if I needed it.4. Would sometimes want to help me if I needed it.5. Would seldom want to help me if I needed it.

62. Think of the Government as it really is1. Almost never makes mistakes.2. Rarel-, makes mistakes.3. Sometimes makes mistakes.4. Often makes mistakes.5. Usually makes mistakes.6. Almost always makes mistakes.

63. Think of the Government as it1 Can punish anyone.2.

3.

4.

5.

CanCanCanCanCan

punishpunishpunishpunishpunish

64. If you think awould you1. Do what he2. Do what he3. Do what he4. Do what he

almost anyonemany people.some people.a few people.no one.

policeman is(Choose one)tells you andtells you buttells you buttells you but

really is...

wrong in what he tells you to do, what

forget about it.

tell your parents about it.ask the policeman why.tell the policeman he is wrong.

65. Which is the most important for the policeman to do? (Choose1. Make people obey the law.2. Help people who are in trouble..

3. Catch people who break the law.

66. If you could vote what would you be?1. A Republican.2. A Democrat.3. Sometimes a Democrat and sometimes a Republican.4. I don't know which I would be.5. I don't know what the words Democrat and Republican mean.

67. When I heard Nixon wen the election over Humphrey: (mark the onewhich is closest to the way you felt at that time) (Optional)1. I was very happy.2. I was happy.3. I didn't much care one way or the other.4. I felt bad.5. I felt so bad I almost cried.

one

Choose one) (Optional),-

-68. (Completed by administrator after the questionnaire was returned. )Race and sex of classroom teacher.1. Black Female.2. Black Male.3. White Female.4. White Male.5. Team.

If your Father or Guardian doesn't live at home anymore, circle answer7 for the next three questions.

69. Think of Your Father as he really is...1. Would always want to help me if I needed it.2. Would almost always want to help me if I needed it.3. Would usually want to help me if I needed it.4. Would sometimes want to help me if I needed it.5. Would seldom want to help me if I needed it.6. Would not usually want to help me if I needed it.7. My Father or Guardian doesn't live at home anymore.

70. Think of Your Father as he really is...1. Almost never makes mistakes.2. Rarely makes mistakes.3. Sometimes makes mistakes.4. Often makes mistakes.5. Usually makes mistakes.6. Almost always makes mistakes.7: My Father or Guardian doesn't live at home anymore.

71. Think of Your Father as he really is...1. Can punish anyone.2, Can punish almost anyone.3. Ca4..punish many people.4. Can punish -some people.5. Can punish a few people.6. Can punish no one.7. My Father or Guardian doesn't live at home aynore.

72. My family doesn't have any say about what the government does.1. YES!! YES!!2. yes3. no opinion4 -. no5. NO!! NO!!

75. Citizens don't have a chance to say what they think about runningthe government.1. -.- YES!! YES!!2.- yes3. no opinion4. no opinion5. no

NO!! NO!!

74. }tow much did you learn from the last election for President?(choose one)I. I learned a lot.2. I learned some.

I learned very little.

75. Which of the following is the best citizen? Choose the sentencethat describes the best citizen.1. He makes up his mind to.be either a Democrat or a Republican

and always votes the way his party does.2. He doesn't join either the Democrats or the Republicans a d

votes for the man he thinks is best.I don't know what the words Democrat and Republican mean.

76. It is better if young people belong to the sane political party astheir parenti. (Choose one)

Yes2. No3. I don't know.

77. When should a person decide which political party to support?1. =Before he goes to high school.2. Before he leaves high school.3. After high school but before he is old enough to vote.4.- After he is old enough to vote.

78.- Hcilw. important do you think it is for grown-ups to belong to eitherthe Republican or Democratic Party? (Choose one)1. Very important.2. important.3. -Not too important.4. Not important at all.5. I don't know.

79. Who makes the laws? Choose the one who does most to make laws.1. Congress

PresidentSupreme CourtI don't know.

8O. (Completed by the administrator after the questionnaire wasreturned.)

Racial-Ethnic membership of student.1. Black2.-J. White

3. Chicano4. Oriental

96